The vote is the biggest shareholder rebellion in UK corporate history, and underlines the depth of investor resentment over "fat-cat" pay. BBC News Online takes a closer look

What has happened, exactly?

At GSK's annual general meeting on Monday, a narrow majority of shareholders voted against lucrative pay deals for the firm's top executives.

The vote has grabbed the headlines because it was the first time that shareholders had rejected a British company's pay policy.

It also marks the high point of a tide of resentment over multi-million-pound pay deals for chief executives at a time when many leading companies are performing poorly, yielding disappointing returns for shareholders.

GSK shares, for instance, have lost about one-third of their value in the three and a half years since chief executive Jean Pierre Garnier took over, amid concerns that the firm has failed to develop new best-selling drugs.

This poor track record steeled investor opposition to a pay deal which would have given Mr Garnier a pay-off of up to �22m ($35.7m) if he was dismissed.

Does this mean Mr Garnier will have to accept a less generous package?

GSK has previously argued that generous pay is needed to attract and retain top talent, particularly in the US, where corporate salaries are typically higher than in Europe.

However, it's likely that Mr Garnier's pay deal will ultimately be scaled back.

The shareholder vote is not legally binding, but GSK would be ill-advised to ignore such a stark warning from its owners.

The company has said it "clearly registers shareholders' sensitivities," and has called in business advisers Deloitte & Touche to review its pay policy.

Is GSK the only company to have got into trouble for overpaying its executives?

Not by a long chalk.

GSK is the only company so far to have had its pay policy voted down, but that shareholder revolt was merely the culmination of a steady groundswell of protest in recent months.

Insurer Royal & Sun Alliance, Barclays bank, and oil giant Shell have all faced significant levels of shareholder dissent over executive pay during the last two months.

Nor is resentment over fat cat pay confined to shareholders. As many top companies shed jobs amid weaker economic growth, the general public is increasingly taking an interest as well.

This has in turn prompted government intervention. The Department of Trade and Industry is currently working on draft proposals for curbing excessive pay.

Is this the end of the road for "fat-cat" pay?

Blue-chip companies will certainly have to be far more careful when it comes to putting together pay deals for top executives - for the time being at least.

Most are likely to appease shareholders by making chief executive salaries more closely related to performance.

This could include the introduction of shorter notice periods, and making greater use of share entitlements - seen as a powerful incentive to keep the stock price high.

However, it's worth bearing in mind that the trend towards inflation-busting corporate pay was a product of the late 1990s boom, while the current backlash against it was born during the subsequent downturn.