Commercial Mediation

Should I mediate a shareholder dispute?

In short: Yes. Mediation is well suited to most shareholder disputes. It is confidential, significantly faster and cheaper than shareholder litigation, and preserves the option of keeping the business running while the dispute is resolved. Courts also expect parties to have attempted mediation before listing a shareholder matter for hearing.

Why shareholder disputes are well suited to mediation

Shareholder disputes — whether between equal partners, majority and minority shareholders, or family shareholders — typically involve long-standing relationships, significant assets, and ongoing business operations that would be damaged by protracted litigation. Mediation addresses all three concerns:

  • Confidentiality — shareholder disputes often involve sensitive financial information. Mediation is confidential; court proceedings are generally public.
  • Speed — shareholder litigation commonly takes two to four years. Mediation can resolve matters in one to two days.
  • Business continuity — the business can keep operating during mediation; protracted litigation typically damages operations and key relationships.
  • Creative outcomes — mediation can produce a buyout at an agreed valuation, a restructured shareholders' agreement, a payment plan, or a staged exit — none of which a court can impose.

What shareholder mediation can cover

Dispute typeMediation outcome examples
Shareholder buyoutAgreed valuation, staged payment, or external sale
Profit distribution disputesRevised distribution formula; arrears settlement
Director/shareholder deadlockUpdated shareholders' agreement; board restructure
Oppression claimsBuyout, restructure, or agreed exit before court application
Family shareholder disputesSuccession arrangements, estate carve-out, or agreed sale

Does a shareholders' agreement affect the process?

Many shareholders' agreements include a dispute resolution clause requiring mediation before legal proceedings. If yours does, mediation is not just advisable — it may be a contractual precondition to commencing court action. Check your agreement before filing any proceedings.

When mediation may not be enough

Mediation is less suitable where one party has engaged in fraud or serious misconduct, where urgent court orders (such as an injunction to stop asset dissipation) are needed, or where one party refuses to engage in good faith. In those cases, legal proceedings may need to run concurrently with or instead of mediation.

Sources

← All questions

Ready to resolve your dispute?

Our accredited mediators help Australians reach agreements without court. Book a free consultation to discuss your situation.

Book a Free Consultation
No obligationTransparent pricingIn person or online