Company: LHI
Filing Date: 2025-02-14
Form Type: DRS/A
Source: 0001213900-25-014190
Chunk: 202

Company: Living Homeopathy International Ltd.
Filing Date: 2025-02-14
Form: DRS/A
Chunk 202
---
 is not                                                                      
 one that would more properly be sanctioned under some other provision of the Companies Act. |

The Companies Act also contains a statutory power of compulsory acquisition which may facilitate the “squeeze out” of dissentient minority shareholders upon a tender offer. When a takeover offer is made and accepted by holders of 90% of the shares affected within four months, the offeror may, within a two-month period commencing on the expiration of such four-month period, require the holders of the remaining shares to transfer such shares to the offeror on the terms of the offer. An objection can be made to the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands but this is unlikely to succeed in the case of an offer which has been so approved unless there is evidence of fraud, bad faith or collusion.

If an arrangement and reconstruction is thus approved and sanctioned, or if a takeover offer is made and accepted, in accordance with the foregoing statutory procedures, a dissenting shareholder would have no rights comparable to appraisal rights, which would otherwise ordinarily be available to dissenting shareholders of Delaware corporations, providing rights to receive payment in cash for the judicially determined value of the shares.

<div align='center'>114</div>

Shareholders’ Suits

In principle, we will normally be the proper plaintiff to sue for a wrong done to us as a company, and as a general rule a derivative action may not be brought by a minority shareholder. However, based on English authorities, which would in all likelihood be of persuasive authority in the Cayman Islands, the Cayman Islands court can be expected to apply and follow the common law principles (namely the rule in Foss v. Harbottle and the exceptions thereto, which limits the circumstances in which a shareholder may bring a derivative action on behalf of the company or a personal action to claim loss which is reflective of loss suffered by the company) which permit a non-controlling shareholder to commence a class action against, or derivative actions in the name of, a company to challenge the following:

| ● | an act which is illegal                                                                                    
 or ultra vires with respect to the company and is therefore incapable of ratification by the shareholders; |

| ● | an act which, although                                                                                                            
 not ultra vires, requires authorization by a qualified (or special) majority (that is, more than a simple majority) which has not 
 been obtained; and                                                                                                                |

| ● | an act which constitutes                                                               
 a fraud on the minority where the wrongdoers are themselves in control of the company. |

In