What Should Actually Be in a Shareholders' Agreement (and What Most Founders Miss)
By Clarence Tan
1. Introduction
(a) Most founders know they need a shareholders' agreement. Fewer have thought carefully about what it should actually contain.
(b) The default assumption is that a shareholders' agreement is a standard document — one that covers share transfers and little else. In practice, a well-drafted shareholders' agreement does considerably more. It governs the relationship between shareholders across the full life of the company, from day-to-day decision-making to the mechanics of an eventual exit.
(c) This post sets out what a shareholders' agreement should address, and identifies the provisions that founders most commonly overlook — sometimes at significant cost.
2. The SHA and the Company Constitution: Understanding How They Work Together
(a) In Singapore, companies are governed by two primary documents: the company constitution (a public document filed with ACRA) and the shareholders' agreement (a private contract between shareholders).
(b) The two documents are not interchangeable. The company constitution sets out the general framework for governance. The shareholders' agreement provides more detailed, tailored arrangements that address the specific concerns of the parties.
(c) A critical — and frequently overlooked — issue is the need for consistency between the two documents. Where exit mechanisms, board appointment rights, or transfer restrictions appear in the shareholders' agreement but are not mirrored in the constitution, enforceability problems can arise. Courts have generally held that the constitution governs the company's relationship with shareholders as a matter of company law, while the shareholders' agreement operates as a contractual matter between the signatories.
(d) Practically, this means that provisions in a shareholders' agreement that affect how shares are held or transferred, or how the board operates, should be reflected in — or at least consistent with — the company constitution. Drafting both documents together, or reviewing them in tandem, is far preferable to addressing inconsistencies after a dispute has already arisen.
3. What a Shareholders' Agreement Is Actually Trying to Do
(a) At its core, a shareholders' agreement is a governance document. It is not simply a defensive measure against worst-case scenarios. Its primary function is to record the commercial understanding between shareholders — how the business will be run, how decisions will be made, and what happens when the parties disagree.
(b) The value of a shareholders' agreement is not abstract. Companies without one frequently discover the gaps in their arrangements when a decision needs to be made under pressure, when a founder wants to leave, or when outside capital enters and the balance of power shifts.
(c) A well-drafted shareholders' agreement reduces the scope for disputes not by anticipating every possible outcome, but by establishing a framework that is clear enough to guide the parties when circumstances change.
4. Core Provisions Every Shareholders' Agreement Should Address
The following provisions form the foundation of any shareholders' agreement, regardless of company stage or structure.
Ownership and Capital Structure
(a) The agreement should clearly set out each shareholder's ownership percentage, the total issued share capital, and the rights attached to each class of shares. Where preference shares or convertible instruments are in issue, the economic rights and priority arrangements must be specified.
Board Composition and Decision-Making
(b) The agreement should specify how the board is constituted, including any investor rights to nominate or appoint directors. It should also distinguish clearly between decisions that can be made by the board alone, those requiring shareholder approval by ordinary resolution, and those requiring unanimous or supermajority consent (reserved matters).
(c) Reserved matters deserve particular attention. A poorly calibrated reserved matters list — one that is too broad or too narrow — can impede effective management or leave shareholders without adequate protection. The list should be calibrated to the company's actual risk profile and governance needs.
Share Transfer Restrictions
(d) Transfer restrictions prevent shares from being sold or transferred to unintended third parties. Standard provisions include pre-emption rights (requiring a selling shareholder to first offer shares to existing shareholders), rights of first refusal, and lock-up periods. In companies with external investors, drag-along and tag-along rights will also form part of this framework.
Dividends and Financial Matters
(e) The agreement should address how profits are distributed, including whether and when dividends are paid, and whether any classes of shares carry priority dividend rights. Where shareholders are also employees or directors, the distinction between dividends and remuneration should be addressed explicitly.
Dispute Resolution
(f) The shareholders' agreement should specify a mechanism for resolving disputes — typically a tiered process beginning with good faith negotiation or mediation, moving to arbitration if unresolved. In Singapore, SIAC arbitration is frequently chosen for its confidentiality and enforceability. The choice of mechanism matters: unlike litigation, arbitration keeps disputes private, which is often important for businesses managing sensitive relationships or fundraising.
5. What Founders Most Commonly Overlook
Even founders who have engaged lawyers to prepare their shareholders' agreement frequently find that the following provisions have been addressed inadequately or not at all.
Founder Vesting and Leaver Provisions
(a) Founder vesting — a mechanism by which a founder's shares vest over time, and are subject to buyback if they leave early — is standard practice in venture-backed companies but less commonly included in founder-only or SME arrangements. It should be.
(b) Without vesting provisions, a departing founder retains their full equity stake regardless of whether they have contributed to the business for one month or five years. This creates misalignment and is frequently the source of significant disputes. Good leaver and bad leaver provisions — which determine the price at which a departing founder's shares are bought back, depending on the circumstances of departure — add further nuance and protection.
Intellectual Property Assignment
(c) Where founders have developed intellectual property prior to incorporation, or continue to develop IP outside their formal role in the company, the shareholders' agreement or an associated IP assignment document should clearly transfer ownership of that IP to the company.
(d) Failure to address IP ownership creates significant risk, particularly where the company's value is substantially derived from technology, software, or proprietary processes. Investors will identify this issue during due diligence; resolving it retrospectively is difficult and often contentious.
Deadlock Resolution Mechanisms
(e) In companies with two equal shareholders or an evenly split board, deadlock is a material risk. Without a resolution mechanism, the company can become paralysed — unable to make decisions, take on capital, or respond to operational challenges.
(f) Common mechanisms include Texas shoot-out or Russian roulette clauses (buy-sell mechanisms where one party names a price and the other must elect to buy or sell at that price), as well as escalation procedures that require disputes to be referred to senior management or independent experts before triggering a buyout.
(g) The appropriate mechanism depends on the company's ownership structure and the relative positions of the shareholders. The key point is that the mechanism must be agreed before a deadlock occurs — not after.
Non-Compete and Non-Solicitation Obligations
(h) It is common for shareholders' agreements to include restrictions on shareholders engaging in competing businesses or soliciting the company's clients and employees after they leave. However, these restrictions must be carefully drafted to be enforceable under Singapore law. Overly broad restrictions — in terms of geographic scope, duration, or the activities covered — are at risk of being struck down as unreasonable restraints of trade.
Confidentiality
(i) Confidentiality obligations in shareholders' agreements often receive less attention than commercial provisions, but they matter. Shareholders — particularly minority shareholders who are not involved in day-to-day operations — have access to commercially sensitive information. The agreement should specify what information is confidential, who is bound, and for how long obligations persist after a shareholder exits.
6. When to Put a Shareholders' Agreement in Place
(a) The right time to enter into a shareholders' agreement is before issues arise. In practical terms, this means at incorporation, or at the latest before external capital enters the company.
(b) Founders often defer this exercise on the basis that the business is still early-stage, that the relationships between co-founders are strong, or that the legal costs are not justified. Each of these reasons becomes significantly less persuasive once a dispute materialises.
(c) A shareholders' agreement entered into early, when the parties are aligned and goodwill is high, is far easier to negotiate than one drafted in response to a disagreement. It is also considerably cheaper than the litigation that often follows the absence of one.
7. Closing Takeaway
(a) A shareholders' agreement is not a formality. It is the foundational governance document for the relationship between shareholders, and its quality directly affects how effectively the company can be managed, how disputes are resolved, and how value is distributed at exit.
(b) The provisions most commonly missed — founder vesting, IP assignment, deadlock mechanisms, and proper alignment with the company constitution — are also those most likely to become contentious at a critical moment. Addressing them carefully at the outset is not just good legal practice; it is good business.
This article is intended for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Readers should seek professional legal advice in respect of their specific circumstances.
© 2026 Clarence & Co LLC. All rights reserved.
