We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics. If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Canada - May 11 2012
On May 4, 2012, Chancellor Strine of the Delaware Court of Chancery issued a decision (Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. v. Vulcan Materials Company) enjoining Martin Marietta from pursuing a hostile transaction to acquire its rival Vulcan Materials for four months
Canada, USA - January 4 2012
Reverse break fees – which are fees paid by the buyer to the seller on the failure of an agreed transaction – are becoming an increasingly standard contractual tool, along with break fees payable by the seller, for allocating the risk of non-consummation of the deal.
Canada, USA - February 17 2011
On February 15, 2011, in Air Products v. Airgas, the Delaware Court of Chancery upheld a “poison pill” strategy that U.S. companies have for decades used to thwart hostile takeover attempts.
Canada - July 30 2010
The British Columbia Securities Commission, in the majority's full reasons for decision in Icahn Partners LP v. Lions Gate Entertainment Corp., has reaffirmed the orthodox Canadian securities regulatory approach to poison pills, explicitly rejecting any departure from orthodoxy suggested by the Ontario Securities Commission’s September 2009 decision in Neo Materials Technologies Inc. and the Alberta Securities Commission’s November 2007 decision in Pulse Data Inc.
Canada - December 31 2009
The decision of the Ontario Securities Commission in Neo Material Technologies and the musings of Vice Chancellor Leo Strine, Jr., of the Delaware Chancery Court, have revived the debate on both sides of the border on whether and when a target board may rely on a poison pill to “just say no” to a hostile takeover bid, pre-empting target shareholders from determining the outcome of the bid.
