Company: BGHL
Filing Date: 2025-10-28
Form Type: F-1/A
Source: 0001213900-25-102958
Chunk: 150

Company: BILLION GROUP HOLDINGS Ltd
Filing Date: 2025-10-28
Form: F-1/A
Chunk 150
---
period commencing on the expiration of such four -monthperiod, require the holders of the remaining shares to transfer such shares 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, or if a takeover offer is made and accepted, 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. 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 permit a non -controllingshareholder 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 the case of a company (not being a bank) having its share capital divided into shares, the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands may, on the application of members holding not less than one fifth of the shares of the company in issue, appoint an inspector to examine the affairs of the company and to report thereon in such manner as the Grand Court shall direct. Indemnification of Directors and Executive Officers and Limitation of Liability The Cayman Islands law does not limit the extent to which a company’s articles of association may provide for indemnification of officers and directors, except to the extent any such provision may be held by the Cayman Islands courts to be contrary to public policy, such as to provide indemnification against the consequences of committing a