The high costs and reputational risks of failed business acquisitions or combinations (business combinations) have increased the need for bidders, target companies and their respective advisers to ensure that the deal is successful, or that they are adequately protected if they fail.

Upon deciding the appropriate type of business combination, care should to be taken to ensure that the interests of the company are adequately protected during any negotiation period and between signing and closing. The company should also acknowledge and address the concerns of any counterparty with respect to any costs associated with a failed transaction. Consequently, deal protection mechanisms are often pleaded and tend to be some of the most heavily negotiated provisions. In negotiating deal protection mechanisms, each director must give due consideration to his/her fiduciary duties and continue to do so during the process — the core duty being to act honestly and in good faith with a view to the best interests of the company.

Deal protection mechanisms are principally covenants or arrangements between a bidder and target company boards that are intended to discourage alternative and/or superior proposals with a view to protecting a bidder’s transaction if such a proposal materializes. From a bidder’s perspective, the need for deal protection provisions principally arises because, among other things, they do not want to be a stalking horse as it were and they wish to realize synergies and projected benefits from the business combination and minimize competition. Also, a considerable amount of time and cost is spent resulting from both negotiating business combinations and anticipated future opportunities. For these reasons, bidders are typically reluctant to enter into a business combination without protecting the deal to the best extent possible.

Read More

Share
Twitter LinkedIn Email Save as PDF
More Publications
26 Mar 2020 |

The response to Covid-19: employment issues

The first seven cases of Covid-19 in Bermuda have been confirmed and the situation continues to deve...

16 Mar 2020 |

Filing deadline looms for Bermuda Private Trust Companies (PTC)

Bermuda’s regulatory regime for trust business has recently been enhanced. A framework for the sup...

13 Mar 2020 |

Appleby contributes five chapters to Global Legal Insights – Fund Finance 2020

Appleby provided five chapters to the Global Legal Insights - Fund Finance 2020 Guide. The publicati...

26 Feb 2020 |

Coronavirus, travel and employee health: What are the issues employers need to be aware of?

The spread of the Coronavirus continues following the initial outbreak in Hubei province, China at t...

25 Feb 2020 |

Technology & Innovation update Q1 2020

In each quarterly issue of the Appleby Asia Alert, we bring you all the latest legislative and regul...

25 Feb 2020 |

Economic Substance update Q1 2020

On 18 February 2020, the Economic and Financial Affairs Council (ECOFIN) announced that Bermuda and ...

20 Feb 2020 |

New ILS funds will be impressive in size

As insurance and reinsurance linked investing remains popular among investors and an attractive sour...

20 Feb 2020 |

Activist shareholders: removal of directors

Shareholder activism is a growing trend among listed companies. Sometimes, the actions of directors ...

3 Feb 2020 |

Getting ready for PIPA

It is possible that the Personal Information Protection Act 2016 could finally become fully operativ...

31 Jan 2020 |

Restructuring & Insolvency 2020

First Published in Lexology Getting The Deal Through