Shareholder remedies for oppression typically involve which of the following?

Shareholder remedies for oppression primarily involve judicial intervention because this is the mechanism through which courts can address and resolve disputes between shareholders and management that result in unfair treatment. When shareholders believe that their rights are being disregarded or that they are being unfairly treated in the company's operations, they can seek relief through the courts. Judicial intervention allows the courts to assess the situation, consider evidence of oppression, and provide remedies that may include ordering the company to buy back shares, appointing a receiver, or even approving a restructuring of the company.

This judicial process is crucial because it provides a formal and impartial means of addressing disputes, aiming to restore fairness and equity among shareholders. The courts have the authority to evaluate the circumstances of the oppression claims and impose solutions that would best rectify the situation.

Regarding other options, while increased dividends, expansion of corporate power, and increased shareholder rights may be relevant discussions in corporate governance, they do not directly relate to the legal processes involved in addressing oppression of shareholders. Increased dividends might be a desired outcome for some shareholders but it does not constitute a remedy for oppression. Expansion of corporate power typically concerns the company's operational policies rather than resolving shareholder disputes. Lastly, increased shareholder rights are more about preventative measures rather than specific remedies after an oppression has