Company: BTBT
Filing Date: 2025-10-31
Form Type: S-3ASR
Source: 0001213900-25-104745
Chunk: 18

Company: Bit Digital, Inc
Filing Date: 2025-10-31
Form: S-3ASR
Chunk 18
---
 at the meeting in question and the statutory majority are acting bona fide without coercion of the minority to promote interests adverse to those of the class; |

| (c) | 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 |

| (d) | 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 minority shareholders. When an 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. A dissenting shareholder may object by making an application to the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands within one month
from the date of notice being given that their shares are being compulsorily acquired. If an arrangement and reconstruction is thus approved,
or if an 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.

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 law authorities, which would in all likelihood be of persuasive authority in the Cayman
Islands, the Cayman Islands courts can be expected to follow and apply 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) 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:

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

| ● | the act complained of, although not ultra vires, requires