翻译一下，很难呀
When I wrote about this deal in 2008, I noted that Delaware did not have a remedy of oppression; this is a heightened standard of review for inequitable actions by majority shareholders in small, privately held corporations. There is some good commentary out there analyzing this case on oppression grounds. (For detailed commentary along these lines, see this analysis by Prof. Gordon Smith .) This may be true, but the typical remedy of oppression is a buyout or a dissolution — an escape for the shareholder.
In this case, Chancellor Chandler actually spent little time on this part of the standard. Instead, he largely relied on the requirement of Unocal that before this analysis was undertaken the board must “identify the proper corporate objectives served by their actions.”
