Company: WCT
Filing Date: 2025-10-07
Form Type: DRS
Source: 0001213900-25-096917
Chunk: 99

Company: Wellchange Holdings Co Ltd
Filing Date: 2025-10-07
Form: DRS
Chunk 99
---
 of the minority to promote interests adverse to those of 
 the class;                                                                                                                            |

| ● | the arrangement is such that may be reasonably approved by                         
 an intelligent and honest man of that class acting in respect of his interest; and |

| ● | the arrangement 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 shareholder upon a tender offer.
When a tender offer is made and accepted by holders of ninety percent (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.

If an arrangement and reconstruction is thus approved,
the 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.

Shareholders’ Suits

In principle, we will normally be the proper plaintiff
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 follow and apply the common
law principles (namely the rule in Foss v. Harbottle and the exceptions thereto) so that a non-controlling shareholder may be permitted
to commence a class action against or derivative actions in the name of the company to challenge actions where:

| ● | a company acts or proposes to act illegally or ultra vires; |

| ● | the act complained of, although not ultra vires, could only                                        
 be effected duly if authorized by more than a simple majority vote that has not been obtained; and |

| ● | those who control the company are perpetrating a “fraud 
 on the minority.”                                       |

<div align='center'>47</div>

Indemnification of Directors and Executive Officers and Limitation of Liability

Cayman Islands law does not limit the extent to
which a company’s memorandum and articles of association may provide for indemnification of officers and directors, except to the
extent any such provision may be held by the Cay