What is the proper method of bringing a derivative action for losses suffered by shareholders of a corporation?

58 All the participants in this appeal ‑‑ the appellants, the respondents, and the intervener ‑‑ raised the issue of whether the appellants’ claims in respect of the losses they suffered in their existing shareholdings through their alleged inability to oversee management of the corporations ought to have been brought as a derivative action in conformity with the rule in Foss v. Harbottle rather than as a series of individual actions. The issue was also raised and discussed in the courts below. In my opinion, a derivative action ‑‑ commenced, as required, by an application under s. 232 of the Manitoba Corporations Act ‑‑ would have been the proper method of proceeding with respect to this claim. Indeed, I would regard this simply as a corollary of the idea that the audited reports are provided to the shareholders as a group in order to allow them to take collective (as opposed to individual) decisions. Let me explain.