A few days ago, SEBI made public its informal guidance issued to Weizmann Forex Ltd. on October 25, 2012. In this case, the target company became listed only in 2011 due to a corporate restructuring process. The question was whether certain shareholders can avail of the exemption for inter se promoter transfer by taking into account the promoter holdings in the previous company from which the...
Mandatory Offers and Creeping Acquisitions
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) passed an order under the SEBI Takeover Regulations of 1997 (that existed prior to October 2011) in relation to the shares of Khaitan Electricals Limited (the Target Company). In this order, the SEBI whole time member directed the promoters of the company to make an open offer to the other shareholders on account of certain acquisitions of shares...
Should Government Companies Be Exempt From the Takeover Regulations?
Today’s Business Standard carries a report indicating that SEBI is in the process of considering a general exemption to the Government from making a mandatory open offer under SEBI’s Takeover Regulations 2011. This comes in the wake of two specific exemptions granted by SEBI this year in the case of IDBI Bank and IFCI whereby the Government was given special dispensation from making an open offer...
Scheme of Arrangement & Tax Authorities: The Vodafone Essar Case
Lately, the income tax authorities have been actively objecting to schemes of arrangement initiated under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 on the ground that the schemes are intended to avoid applicable taxes. Such objections are usually raised when the scheme is presented for sanction of the High Court. This scenario has been played out last week in a decision of the Gujarat High...
Interpreting the Takeover Regulations
With the current Takeover Regulations (that came into effect in October 2011) being fairly recent, they are being subjected to interpretation during the course of their functioning. SEBI this week issued two sets of informal guidance in the context of one takeover. The first pertains to whether an acquirer holding less than 25% can make a voluntary offer and then acquire shares in the market...
Delaware Courts Allow Litigation to Move at the Speed of Business
[The following post comes to us from Andrea Tinianow, who is a vice president and assistant general counsel at Corporation Service Company. She is also a Delaware attorney. This post relates to the Delaware Supreme Court’s decision upholding the Chancery Court in Martin Marietta Materials inc. v. Vulcan Materials, Inc. We had earlier discussed some of the substantive aspects of the Chancery...
Confidentiality Agreements in M&A Transactions: Lessons from Delaware
Background Amongst legal documents in an M&A transaction, the confidentiality agreement plays an important role, as it does in other types of investment transactions (such as private equity), especially when it involves a public listed company. There are two key aspects of interest in any confidentiality agreement, which are also often the bone of contention in negotiations: (i) the scope of...
The Debate over Staggered Boards
Staggered boards are found to be a form of anti-takeover defence. This concept, which is prevalent in several U.S. companies, ensures that only a third of the board can change each year. Hence, it would not be possible for shareholders to replace the board, except through a gradual process of changing a third of the board each year. There is an interesting battle brewing in the U.S...
Bhopal Gas Tragedy: Revisiting Issues of Liability under Corporate Law
Over at Critical Twenties, Arghya Sengupta has initiated a debate “on the twin issues of the legal responsibility of a successor multi-national company for the liabilities of its predecessor as well as … thoughts on the appropriateness of the Olympics partnering with such a corporation would be most appreciated.” I have sought to step into the debate by addressing questions of legal liability...
Miscellaneous
1. Reactions to Vodafone The discussions on the Vodafone judgment of the Supreme Court continue to raise questions regarding tax avoidance, and also aspects of corporate law (distinguishing the sale of shares and sale of assets). While Prashant Bhushan has raised questions regarding the judgment on several counts (here and here), Arvind Datar...
Recent Comments