Resolutions for the General Meeting of Shareholders
Annual General Meeting, 43rdElection of 1 director, excluding directors who are Audit and Supervisory Committee Members
Removal of 2 directors
AVI JAPAN OPPORTUNITY TRUST PLC proposed the election of Suhama Yoichi (洲濵 陽一) as a director and the removal of Ide Nobutaka (井出 信孝) and Nakajima Takashi (中嶋 崇史) as directors. The Board of Directors opposes both proposals. The Company's proposals are Proposals No. 1 through No. 6.
A shareholder proposal is a resolution submitted by a shareholder, rather than by the company.| Item | Details |
|---|---|
| Type of shareholders' meeting | Annual General Meeting, 43rd |
| Date and time | 25 June 2026 (start time: Not disclosed) |
| Matters for resolution | Proposal No. 7: Election of 1 director, excluding directors who are Audit and Supervisory Committee Members, Proposal No. 8: Removal of 2 directors |
| Shareholder Proposal | AVI JAPAN OPPORTUNITY TRUST PLC proposed the election of Suhama Yoichi (洲濵 陽一) as a director and the removal of Ide Nobutaka (井出 信孝) and Nakajima Takashi (中嶋 崇史) as directors. The Board of Directors opposes both proposals. The Company's proposals are Proposals No. 1 through No. 6. |
| Director nominee | There is 1 candidate under the shareholder proposal, including 1 new candidate and 1 outside director candidate. The Company-proposed candidates include 2 new outside director candidates, but the total number of candidates is Not disclosed. |
Items this document does not state (1)
These are items the company does not state in this document. We do not leave them blank, nor fill them in from other sources or by inference.
The reasons the company gives
The company's own explanation, not something inferred from the numbers.The Company determined that the composition of the Board of Directors, including the candidates proposed by the Company, is appropriate in terms of diversity, expertise and the balance of skills, and that there is little need to add the candidates proposed by the shareholder. The Company also determined that there are no grounds for removing the 2 directors subject to the removal proposal and that they possess the qualities and qualifications that contribute to enhancing corporate value and the common interests of shareholders.