Tak Lee fails in bid to block Shaftesbury director re-elections

Hong Kong billionaire Samuel Tak Lee has failed to win sufficient backing to vote against key Shaftesbury re-elections. Shareholders voted at the firms’ annual general meeting today (8 February), held at Soho’s Ham Yard Hotel. Major shareholder Lee said yesterday (7 February) that he intended to vote for the first time against the board’s remuneration policies and the re-appointment of the firm’s chairman, Jonathan Nicholls, chief executive, Brian Bickell, and finance director, Chris Ward. The number of votes passing against the company’s remuneration policy amounted to 29% of the votes cast. The proportion of votes against the reappointment of the firm’s chairman, Jonathan Nicholls, chief executive, Brian Bickell, and finance director, Chris Ward came in at 29.5%,  29.3% and 29.3% respectively. However, he did manage to block the firm’s ability to allot shares in certain circumstances on a non pre-emptive for the second consecutive year. Votes against resolutions 19 and 20 were cast at 29% and 29.8% respectively. But he was unable to block a general rights issue to all of its shareholders. Votes in favour of resolution 18 were cast at 31%. This is because resolution 18, which allows existing shareholders to purchase new shares in the company, requires only 50% of the votes cast to be in favour, while the other resolutions named above need 75%. As a result, Lee, with his 26.15% shareholding, could block these. Shaftesbury chairman, Jonathan Nicholls, said at the company’s AGM today (8 February): “The company has sought to repeatedly engage Mr Lee in person in respect of his concerns about the placing and all other aspects of the company’s business. I want to make clear the company rejects the suggestions made that there has been any breach of duty by your board.” In a statement today, a representative of Tak Lee said: ““Mr Lee has blocked two resolutions at the AGM, preventing the directors from allotting more shares on a non-pre-emptive basis. Nevertheless, he still seeks answers from the board in relation to what he sees as its improper conduct of Shaftesbury’s December 2017 capital raising. “Unless Mr Lee gets a satisfactory response in relation to the concerns he has raised with the board, he will be left with no choice but to litigate and, given the board’s unsatisfactory responses to date, at present this appears unavoidable.” To send feedback, e-mail anna.ward@egi.co.uk or tweet @annaroxelana or @estatesgazette