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.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 15

Developments in Canadian poison pill jurisprudence

  • Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • January 19 2012

In a rather active year for hostile M&A activity in Canada, there were only two shareholder rights plan decisions

Certicom v. RIM: when is a confidentiality agreement a standstill, too?

  • Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • March 12 2009

A recent dust-up between Research in Motion Limited (RIM) and Certicom Corp. in the course of RIM’s hostile take-over bid for Certicom has once again raised the issue of the effect and effectiveness of confidentiality and standstill agreements in Canadian M&A practice

Critical elements for a successful global investment strategy: advance planning, socially responsible behaviour, and heeding local and community interests

  • Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • September 30 2010

The recently announced $130 million settlement by the Canadian government of the claim made by AbitibiBowater Inc. (“AbitibiBowater”), based on the investment chapter of the North American Free Trade Agreement (“NAFTA Chapter 11”), concerning legislation passed by the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador to expropriate its assets in that province, shows that such harmful measures can be imposed not only by governments in emerging market countries but also in highly developed economies

The role of litigation in M&A tactics and strategy - greater than ever

  • Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • January 13 2011

New situations as well as differences in viewpoints among provincial securities commissions, and between the commissions and the courts, will continue to shape the framework in which M&A transactions take place

Do investment funds share their portfolio companies’ ERISA liability? A U.S. district court says no

  • Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 12 2012

In 2007, the U.S. Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) created a furor in the investment and employee benefits worlds when it issued an advisory opinion finding that a private equity fund that owned at least 80 of a portfolio company could be liable for the portfolio company’s plan termination underfunding under Title IV of the U.S. Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA

Court holds that purchasers of U.S. assets may step into ERISA liability: some negotiation tips for buyers

  • Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • -
  • European Union
  • -
  • February 16 2011

In many asset sales, buyers expressly state that they are not assuming any liability for pre-closing benefit plan operations

Key lessons from the BCE decision

  • Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • December 22 2008

The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) released the long-awaited reasons for its decision in the BCE Inc

The path forward: poison pills in Canada after Pulse Data, Neo and Lions Gate

  • Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • September 30 2010

Recent decisions of the Alberta, Ontario and British Columbia securities commissions on applications to set aside shareholder rights plans or "poison pills" adopted in response to a hostile take-over bid have called into question whether Canadian securities regulators now hold a consistent view as to when it will be appropriate for a commission to intervene to remove a shareholder rights plan as an obstacle to individual shareholders deciding for themselves whether to tender their shares to the bid

Key lessons from the Magna decisions

  • Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • September 30 2010

The recently completed plan of arrangement of Magna International resulted in the elimination of its dual class share structure and the creation of a single class of equity securities in which all shareholders have a vote in proportion to their relative equity stake

Maintaining solicitor-client privilege when deal teams are formed

  • Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • June 23 2011

Corporate clients typically assemble “deal teams” comprised of individuals with specialised expertise to assist them in negotiating a transaction