Cross-Border M&A

Subscribe to Cross-Border M&A via RSS

The German Government published a draft legislation which would facilitate the dismissal of so-called “risk takers” in the German financial sector.  This is one of various measures by which the German Government intends to address upcoming Brexit challenges and to increase the attractiveness of Germany as business location for financial institutions currently based in the UK.

Current Legal Situation

German employees are benefitting from extensive protection against dismissal.  Under German labor law, the termination of an employment relationship requires a valid justification (e.g., redundancy or misconduct) for which the German labor courts have set high standards.  Therefore, the affected employee is often in a good position to challenge the validity of the termination and claim the continuation of the employment relationship before court.Continue Reading German Government Plans to Reduce Dismissal Protection for “Risk Takers” in the Financial Sector

Voting rights held by shareholders who are “acting in concert” are mutually attributed for purposes of the German Securities Trading Act (“WpHG”) and the German Takeover Act (“WpÜG”).  Such attribution may thus not only trigger (additional) voting rights notifications, if the relevant voting rights thresholds are reached or crossed, but also the obligation to launch a mandatory offer, if based on the voting rights so attributed a shareholder acquires control of a company.  In light of these implications, the question of what type of behavior constitutes acting in concert is of high practical relevance.  Unfortunately, the definition in statutory law is open-ended, and several details are heavily disputed.  In its decision of September 25, 2018 (II ZR 190/17), the German Federal Court of Justice (“FCJ”) had the opportunity to clarify two important questions:

First, the coordination of shareholder behavior in an individual case does not qualify as acting in concert. According to the FCJ, the question of whether coordination among shareholders is limited to an “individual case” is to be determined applying a formal rather than substantive test. Second, mutual coordination of conduct among shareholders does not constitute acting in concert if it is aimed at maintaining an existing corporate strategy (or defining it for the first time), rather than at bringing about a permanent and material change to an existing corporate strategy.
Continue Reading German Federal Court of Justice on Acting in Concert of Shareholders

Foreign investors who, for many years, eagerly awaited the ability to establish majority or wholly owned businesses in the United Arab Emirates (“UAE”) outside the free zones can prepare their bait—but cannot go fishing yet.

Following an announcement made by the UAE Council of Ministers earlier this year, the long-awaited Foreign Direct Investment Law was…

As both shareholder activists, and the companies they target, become more geographically diverse, it is increasingly important for legal and corporate practitioners to understand the legal framework and emerging trends of shareholder activism in the various international jurisdictions facing activism. The Shareholder Rights and Activism Review is designed as a primer on these aspects of…

On October 10, 2018, the Department of the Treasury issued interim regulations (“Interim Regulations”) for the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (“CFIUS”) to conduct a pilot program implementing provisions relating to critical technologies of the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act of 2018 (“FIRRMA”), which recently amended the Exon-Florio amendments to the…

The record breaking heat this past summer left M&A activities cold. Signa and Hudson’s Bay agree on a merger between Karstadt and Kaufhof. Signa takes over the lead role. In addition, Signa acquires significant real estate properties from Hudson’s Bay. Via Warwick, Morgan Stanley submits a takeover offer for all shares of the logistics company…

German law corporate acquisition agreements and real estate purchase agreements often include broad exclusions of liability.  However, pursuant to Section 444 of the German Civil Code (Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch), a seller is subject to statutory (non-excludable) liability if and to the extent the seller fraudulently concealed a defect of the sold asset.  To that end, it is often decisive whether the seller was required to inform the buyer about the defect in question.
Continue Reading German Federal Court of Justice on Seller Disclosure Obligations: Extensive Disclosure Required in Environmental Context

On August 1, 2018 the U.S. Senate joined the U.S. House of Representatives in agreeing to a conference report that sent the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (“NDAA”), which incorporated a version of the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act of 2018 (“FIRRMA”), to the U.S. President for his signature. The President…

On June 26, 2018, the U.S. House of Representatives passed its version of the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act of 2018 (“FIRRMA”). Just over a week earlier, the U.S. Senate passed the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019, which incorporated its version of FIRRMA. The bills, which passed their respective chambers by…