Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Special pages
Niidae Wiki
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Dividend
(section)
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Page information
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
==History== {{Further|Financial history of the Dutch Republic|Dutch East India Company}} The [[Dutch East India Company]] (VOC) was the first recorded (public) company to pay regular dividends.<ref>Freedman, Roy S.: ''Introduction to Financial Technology''. (Academic Press, 2006, {{ISBN|0123704782}})</ref><ref>[[DK Publishing|DK Publishing (Dorling Kindersley)]]: ''The Business Book (Big Ideas Simply Explained)''. (2014, {{ISBN|1465415858}})</ref> The VOC paid annual dividends worth around 18 percent of the value of the shares for almost 200 years of existence (1602β1800).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mondovisione.com/exchanges/handbook-articles/who-needs-stock-exchanges/ |author=Chambers, Clem |title=Who needs stock exchanges? |publisher=Mondo Visione |date=14 July 2006 |access-date=14 May 2017 }}</ref> In [[common law jurisdictions]], courts have typically refused to intervene in companies' dividend policies, giving directors wide discretion as to the declaration or payment of dividends. The principle of non-interference was established in the Canadian case of ''Burland v Earle'' (1902), the British case of ''Bond v Barrow Haematite Steel Co'' (1902), and the Australian case of ''[[Miles v Sydney Meat-Preserving Co Ltd]]'' (1912). However in ''Sumiseki Materials Co Ltd v Wambo Coal Pty Ltd'' (2013) the [[Supreme Court of New South Wales]] broke with this precedent and recognised a shareholder's contractual right to a dividend.<ref>{{cite journal|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305379599 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221120092531/https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jean-Plessis/publication/305379599_A_shareholder's_contractual_right_to_a_dividend_and_a_company's_oppressive_conduct_in_withholding_dividend_payments_Sumiseki_Materials_Co_Ltd_v_Wambo_Coal_Pty_Ltd/links/57cd6f7208ae89cd1e8b4ac6/A-shareholders-contractual-right-to-a-dividend-and-a-companys-oppressive-conduct-in-withholding-dividend-payments-Sumiseki-Materials-Co-Ltd-v-Wambo-Coal-Pty-Ltd.pdf |archive-date=20 November 2022 |url-status=live|title=A shareholder's contractual right to a dividend and a company's oppressive conduct in withholding dividend payments: Sumiseki Materials Co Ltd v Wambo Coal Pty Ltd|first1= Jean|last1=du Plessis|first2=Stephen|last2=Alevras|journal=Companies and Securities Law Journal|volume=32|year=2014}}</ref>
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to Niidae Wiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
Encyclopedia:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Search
Search
Editing
Dividend
(section)
Add topic