• PRO
  • Events
  • About
  • Blog Popular
  • Login
  • Register
  • PRO
  • Resources
    • Latest updates
    • Q&A
    • In-depth
    • In-house view
    • Practical resources
    • FromCounsel New
    • Commentary
  • Research tools
    • Global research hub
    • Lexy
    • Primary sources
    • Scanner
    • Research reports
  • Resources
  • Research tools
  • Learn
    • All
    • Masterclasses
    • Videos
  • Learn
  • Experts
    • Find experts
    • Influencers
    • Client Choice New
    • Firms
    • About
    Introducing Instruct Counsel
    The next generation search tool for finding the right lawyer for you.
  • Experts
  • My newsfeed
  • Events
  • About
  • Blog
  • Popular
  • Find experts
  • Influencers
  • Client Choice New
  • Firms
  • About
Introducing Instruct Counsel
The next generation search tool for finding the right lawyer for you.
  • Compare
  • Topics
  • Interviews
  • Guides

Analytics

Review your content's performance and reach.

  • Analytics dashboard
  • Top articles
  • Top authors
  • Who's reading?

Content Development

Become your target audience’s go-to resource for today’s hottest topics.

  • Trending Topics
  • Discover Content
  • Horizons
  • Ideation

Client Intelligence

Understand your clients’ strategies and the most pressing issues they are facing.

  • Track Sectors
  • Track Clients
  • Mandates
  • Discover Companies
  • Reports Centre

Competitor Intelligence

Keep a step ahead of your key competitors and benchmark against them.

  • Benchmarking
  • Competitor Mandates
Home

Back Forward
  • Save & file
  • View original
  • Forward
  • Share
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Linked In
  • Follow
    Please login to follow content.
  • Like
  • Instruct

add to folder:

  • My saved (default)
  • Read later
Folders shared with you

Register now for your free, tailored, daily legal newsfeed service.

Questions? Please contact [email protected]

Register

Shareholder activism in the UK- Recent activist campaigns and the legal and regulatory framework

Herbert Smith Freehills LLP

To view this article you need a PDF viewer such as Adobe Reader. Download Adobe Acrobat Reader

If you can't read this PDF, you can view its text here. Go back to the PDF .

United Kingdom January 24 2023

Shareholder activism in the UK

Recent activist campaigns and the legal and regulatory framework 2023

// 1

Contents

01 02 03

An introduction to activism

Recent activist campaigns in the UK

The legal and regulatory regime in the UK

2

1 An introduction to activism

// 3

3

Laura Ackroyd

Gavin Davies

Greg Mulley

Mark Bardell

Antonia Kirkby

Brian O'Malley

Introduction

Shareholder activism continues to be a key feature of global markets.

While shareholder activism is by no means a new concept, the profile of investors taking an activist stance and the outcomes they seek to achieve continues to evolve alongside wider market developments.

The tactics that an activist uses on a campaign will to some extent depend on the tools available to it under the relevant legal and regulatory regimes. In the UK, shareholders have a range of specific rights under the Companies Act which they can implement to help achieve their goals. These include:

the right to get a copy of the register of members of the company

the ability to requisition a resolution at an AGM or requisition a shareholder meeting and

the power to remove or appoint directors.

Activists must also be aware of a number of other legal and regulatory issues when conducting a campaign to make sure they don't fall foul of restrictions or obligations.

In this guide we:

look at what activism is and some of the common objectives of activist campaigns

highlight some recent interesting activist campaigns

provide a snapshot of the key thresholds for shareholders' rights under the Companies Act 2006 and some of the other legal and regulatory requirements and restrictions in the UK that will have to be considered in the event of an activist campaign.

For further information on any of these issues, please ask your usual Herbert Smith Freehills contact.

// 4

What is shareholder activism and who are the activists?

What is shareholder activism?

Who are activist shareholders?

Shareholder activism is a generic term used to describe an approach by a shareholder or shareholder group to a company's board, and if necessary to its fellow shareholders, seeking to effect change within a company.

An approach by an activist can take many different forms and seek to achieve a variety of outcomes, which are considered in more detail below. Broadly speaking, activism may be driven by a specific event that presents an opportunity to quickly increase the value of the company, such as acquiring or disposing of a business, or it may be driven by longer-term strategic or operational issues, where activists intervene as a result of a problem, or opportunity, they see in a company's business strategy or structure.

The term "shareholder activist" covers a broad spectrum of investors, with activism no longer being the solo pursuit of pure activist funds.

Instead, we are seeing campaigns by private equity investors (such as KKR), institutional investors (such as BlackRock), new activist investors (such as Bluebell Capital) and even traditional investors who have joined forces with activists.

// 5

Common areas of focus for activists

Shareholders taking an activist stance may do so for a number of reasons, from seeking to tackle a specific issue to encouraging complete overhaul. Their focus may include:

Transactional opportunity

Shareholders may seek to influence corporate activity, such as calling for the company to enter into an M&A transaction or to dispose of a non-core part of the business in order to maximise value.

Strategy

Shareholders may feel that the strategy of the company does not align with long-term goals and company purpose or they may feel that the company is heading in the wrong direction strategically.

Business performance

Shareholders may perceive there to be a problem with company performance for example in terms of financials.

Share capital

Shareholders may be unhappy with the company's capital structure, and so may be looking for a return of capital or share buyback.

Governance

Shareholders may take issue with the remuneration policy or leadership, and ultimately may seek to appoint and remove directors.

ESG

Shareholders are increasingly targeting companies' approach to environmental and social issues, most notably around climate change.

// 6

2 Recent activist campaigns in the UK

// 7

7

M&A and activism

M&A continues to be a key focus for shareholder activists, with 41% of the campaigns seen in 2022 featuring an M&A related goal (whether the activists were opposing M&A, pushing for M&A or seeking an increase in price known as "bumpitrage").

Private M&A

Activist shareholders in private M&A may be able to block a deal, or force the company to renegotiate it, if the company needs shareholder approval to proceed. Situations where shareholder approval will be required include where:

the transaction is a Class 1 or related party transaction or a reverse takeover under the Listing Rules; and/or

shares are to be issued in order to finance an acquisition and shareholder approval is needed for authority to allot shares or disapply pre-emption rights.

Conversely, shareholders may encourage the company to acquire or dispose of a business. For example, the shareholder may feel that the company's business has become too diversified or that a certain aspect of the business does not align with the company strategy or purpose and that disposing of it would increase the value of the company.

Recent examples Capricorn Energy

(2022/2023): Its proposed merger with Tullow Oil was terminated following shareholder opposition. It then announced a new deal which has also drawn opposition from shareholders, including a requisition to replace seven directors. Royal Dutch Shell plc and Third Point (2021): The company is facing pressure from Third Point to break itself up. Glencore and Bluebell Capital (2021): Bluebell Capital encouraged the company to sell its coal assets. Elementis (2018): Elementis entered into an agreement to acquire Mondo a transaction which required shareholder approval. Shareholders required a renegotiation of the purchase price post announcement

Public M&A

On a takeover, it is the shareholders who determine whether the offer is accepted or rejected. Whilst a recommendation from the target board carries significant weight, the target board cannot determine whether an offer is successful it is the shareholders that have the final say.

In the course of a bid, activist and active shareholders may seek to influence the outcome of the offer in a number of ways:

Encouraging M&A: They may call for the company to put itself up for sale.

Affecting M&A: They may seek to force the bidder to increase its offer price, for example by threatening to hold out against the bid or stating that they will not accept an offer below a specified value (known as bumpitrage). The bidder may decide to declare its offer final in order to deter the use of this tactic.

Threatening M&A: They may seek to block a takeover, either by voting it down or seeking to challenge a scheme in some other way at the court sanction hearing. Ultimately, the activists have to consider if a deal being blocked is actually what they want to achieve.

Recent examples

Encouraging M&A Merlin Entertainments (2020):

ValueAct published an open letter urging the Merlin board to seek a buyer to take the company private. The company was taken over shortly afterwards by a consortium including Blackstone and KIRKBI Volga Gas a 59% shareholder in the company agreed to pay the bidder up to US$200,000 towards its costs if the offer did not proceed.

Affecting M&A Kaz Minerals (2020): Nova

Resources (a 39% shareholder) announced an offer for Kaz Minerals by way of scheme. Two other large shareholders urged other shareholders to vote against the scheme unless the offer value was increased. Nova switched from a scheme to an offer and increased the offer price twice before declaring it to be final.

Threatening M&A Spire Healthcare (2021) and

Playtech (2022): Schemes to approve the takeover of Spire and Playtech were voted down by shareholders.

// 8

ESG and activism

Activist shareholders are paying increasing attention to safeguarding the long-term value of the companies in which they are invested, scrutinising strategy and performance against ESG considerations, such as climate change. In its Annual Review of Shareholder Activism, Lazard noted that "2021 saw the rapid proliferation of ESG as a key plank in activists' platforms".

This shift in focus reflects wider market trends and the increased drive for sustainability and corporate transparency. A clear example of this is the introduction of rules requiring companies to report in line with the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosure (TCFD) Recommendations and the TCFD Recommended Disclosures and the growing ability of shareholders to measure a company's performance against a range of metrics.

This area in particular may be where companies face a greater risk of a claim being brought against. Whilst shareholder litigation in the UK is rare, this may become the exception to that rule.

Recent examples: CatcRtChhomoolaeimemyotcnapiupnotlanEasmDntnuaspyuifreftatatiohsccngiaihyAeas'nscibSnattrbhstpe2toteera0acemlc0llrpihd6ppma.toloriacnafftgtedadiointirrroneidescfbckCottr.oorilCnrirtesgshli'neefadtonEunrdtteEafeieatrartsizirlvhietnuahr(gnto2iesd0ttoecr2calro2pantn)rihms:oteietteianocgdntaintihngest hbSeaascinofsimlebeduarayc'scspreepdclciitaealdnreadssoSalhuLatiiorveninAcgcatWliloinangge(f2oE0r 2mS2ap)il:noSsybehura.rrye'As ctotion Tw(ipsnwteriveothshemdecdsurmortecoaibtarwnisoyngnndfTifflreoeoionsfdlmlcvuoaoenwhshpcienteroaoogamlrptlesthmohniselyigetartapdelpgrfdroboeodrtymdouTuSeceschntessttacst.w)rotTa.eihttrAohgecertrtheteiseodstunococlo(uei2mnti0tcohp2rnaee1naw)y:saeTshseales

// 9

3 The legal and regulatory regime in the UK

// 10

10

Key thresholds under Companies Act 2006

Shareholder right

Shareholding required

Comment

Companies Act reference

Inspection and copy rights for the register of members and any register of Any shareholder may beneficial interests following a section request 793 request

By getting a copy of the register of members, an activist can find out the identity of other shareholders which can then be used to gain support for the shareholder's cause. The request must be made for a "proper purpose". Canvassing support for a meeting/resolution should constitute a proper purpose.

The shareholder register will only show the legal owner of shares. As many shares will be held through nominees, any register of beneficial interests and disclosures about major shareholders, including under DTR 5, should also be reviewed.

Sections 116, 809 and 811

Attend and speak at a general meeting

(e.g. to ask awkward questions or state an opinion). The right can be exercised

Any shareholder

via a proxy or representative.

A shareholder can require an answer to questions relating to the business of the meeting; although the board is not required to answer if it would involve disclosure of confidential information or not be in the interests of the company.

Sections 319A and 324

Requisition a general meeting Requisition a resolution at an AGM

5%

A resolution is not treated as having been properly requisitioned if it would be ineffective if passed because it is inconsistent with the company's articles or is defamatory or vexatious.

Section 303

5% or 100 members

The comments above in relation to requisitioning a meeting apply here too. A shareholder with less than 5% could split its shareholding, transferring shares to 99 other affiliates/nominees to meet the 100 member threshold (the same applies to the following two rows).

Section 338

Have a statement of up to 1000 words

circulated at the company's expense in relation to any resolution or business to

5%

or 100

members

be dealt with at a general meeting

In practice, activist shareholders would normally publish and circulate their own statements on any resolution they have proposed or strongly oppose. This right is more likely to be relevant to highlight grievances or perceived corporate governance issues more generally.

Section 314

Request an independent report on a poll taken on a vote at a general meeting

5% or 100 members

As any vote of a listed company is likely to be conducted through a poll which is supervised by an independent registrar, exercising this right is unlikely to achieve much and making the Section 342 request could be seen as excessive by other shareholders.

// 11

Key thresholds under Companies Act 2006

Shareholder right

Shareholding required

Comment

Block a special resolution (e.g. a resolution to disapply pre-emption rights on an issue of shares by the company or a resolution to cancel the company's listing)

25% plus one vote (of those attending and voting)

Block an ordinary resolution

50% (of those attending and voting)

Pass an ordinary resolution

50% plus one vote (of those attending and voting)

Companies Act reference

Section 283

Appoint a director

50% plus one vote (of those attending and voting)

This is usually provided for in the articles. The articles typically include additional notice requirements where an individual is not proposed by the board. Listed companies now typically reappoint all directors at their AGM. A director can be appointed (or removed) separately without affecting the appointment of the other directors.

Remove a director Pass a special resolution

50% plus one vote (of The right to remove a director under this section overrides any contractual provisions

those attending and (although the individual may be entitled to compensation from the company for loss of

voting)

office/employment). Special notice of 28 days must be given of any such resolution.

75% (of those attending and voting)

Section 168

Section 283

// 12

Legal and regulatory issues in activist situations

While the legal and regulatory framework in the UK affords activists the tools with which to launch and progress a campaign, it also sets boundaries within which they must operate.

Disclosure obligations (DTR 5)

Shareholders in a listed company are required to notify the company if their interests reach, exceed or fall below specified thresholds. The relevant thresholds are 3% (5% for fund managers) and then every 1% change thereafter (DTR 5.1.2). This will be relevant for shareholders seeking to build their stake in the company.

Removing and appointing directors to the board

The Companies Act 2006 contains additional requirements as regards notice and information when a shareholder is looking to remove a director from a board and/or have someone appointed as director.

If an activist does not comply with these requirements, a company may look to reject the requisition as defective.

National Security and Investment Act

Related party and controlling shareholder rules (LR 11)

If the target company operates in one of the 17 sectors specified in the National Security and Investment Act, or the acquisition of a stake in the company may otherwise raise national security concerns, the acquisition of the stake may have to be notified and approval for the transaction obtained. It is possible the acquisition of a stake of 15% may trigger the regime.

Where a shareholder has a stake of 10% or more, it is deemed to be a related party of the company. Transactions between a listed company and the shareholder will then have to be disclosed, and shareholder approval may be required for transactions.

If a shareholder has 30% or more of a premium listed company, a relationship agreement must be put in place.

The Takeover Code

Regulated entities

Validity of resolutions

The Takeover Code may be engaged if shareholders are seeking to implement a "board-control seeking" proposal.

The Takeover Code also imposes disclosure obligations on shareholders with a 1%+ stake in a company that is in an offer period.

If the entity in which the activist is investing is regulated by the FCA or PRA, the activist may need approval to acquire a stake of 10% or more in the company.

If the activist does not construct its requisitioned resolutions properly, the company may challenge their validity and decline to put them to a meeting.

Market abuse (MAR)

It is not just the company that needs to be monitoring for inside information.

Shareholders need to consider MAR and the inside information/insider dealing provisions, as well as the rules on market manipulation, when they are discussing their strategy and looking to build a stake in the company.

// 13

Further information

For further information on the nature of activists their objectives and tactics and strategies for preparing and dealing with an

activist campaign see our 2023 Activism Guide, available on our Herbert Smith Freehills activism hub.

// 14

// 15

Herbert Smith Freehills LLP - Laura Ackroyd, Greg Mulley, Gavin Davies, Mark Bardell, Antonia Kirkby and Brian O'Malley

Back Forward
  • Save & file
  • View original
  • Forward
  • Share
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Linked In
  • Follow
    Please login to follow content.
  • Like
  • Instruct

add to folder:

  • My saved (default)
  • Read later
Folders shared with you

Filed under

  • United Kingdom
  • Company & Commercial
  • Environment & Climate Change
  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP

Topics

  • Corporate governance
  • Private equity
  • Climate change
  • ESG
  • Confidential information

Laws

  • National Security and Investment Act 2021 (UK)

Organisations

  • European Free Trade Association
  • Shell
  • Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (UK)

Popular articles from this firm

  1. Corporate Governance snapshot: The EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive & its impact in the UK *
  2. The IP in AI: Can IP rights protect AI systems? *
  3. Trade mark protection in virtual worlds/the metaverse - IP offices respond with new classes for registration of virtual goods/NFTs as trade marks and the EUIPO deals with “metaverse” marks *
  4. FinTech Global FS Regulatory Round-up - w/e 17 March 2023 *
  5. FinTech Global FS Regulatory Round-up - w/e 24 March 2023 *

If you would like to learn how Lexology can drive your content marketing strategy forward, please email [email protected].

Powered by Lexology

Related practical resources PRO

  • How-to guide How-to guide: Understanding environmental, social and governance (ESG)
  • How-to guide How-to guide: What general counsel (GC) need to know about environmental, social and governance (ESG)
  • How-to guide How-to guide: How to understand and implement the ‘E’ in environmental, social and governance (ESG)
View all

Related research hubs

  • Private equity
  • Corporate governance
  • United Kingdom
  • Environment & Climate Change
  • Company & Commercial
Back to Top
Resources
  • Daily newsfeed
  • Commentary
  • Q&A
  • Research hubs
  • Learn
  • In-depth
  • Lexy: AI search
  • Scanner
Experts
  • Find experts
  • Legal Influencers
  • Firms
  • About Instruct Counsel
More
  • About us
  • Blog
  • Events
  • Popular
Legal
  • Terms of use
  • Cookies
  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy policy
Contact
  • Contact
  • RSS feeds
  • Submissions
 
  • Login
  • Register
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Follow on LinkedIn

© Copyright 2006 - 2023 Law Business Research

Law Business Research