Canada: Valuing the Business: Strategies for Structuring Your Purchase Price

Last Updated: October 8 2015
Practice Guide by Duff & Phelps


In many open market transactions, considerable emphasis is placed on attempting to establish the ‘correct value’ of an acquisition target. However, the valuation of a business is a subjective exercise. Business values can change considerably based on assumptions regarding future cash flows, discount rates, growth rates, and so on. Therefore, while an objective assessment of  business value based on sound methodologies and principles is important, a purchaser should be cognizant of the underlying ‘economic drivers’ that influence the value of a particular business.

This will allow the purchaser to structure a transaction in a way that will reduce the risk of ‘overpaying’ for an acquisition target in circumstances where the returns (cash flows) arising from an acquisition do not materialize to the extent anticipated. By matching the risks and rewards associated with an acquisition (to the extent practical), the purchaser is employing a ‘value-based pricing strategy’.

This paper begins with a discussion of the components of value and price, including how purchasers normally determine the value of an acquisition target. Given this foundation, the paper then addresses how a ‘value-based pricing’ transaction structure can be developed. This includes an examination of how a purchaser can use alternate forms of consideration and other aspects of the deal to reduce the risks inherent in a particular acquisition. The paper concludes with a discussion of specific considerations for public-entity purchasers in terms of financial reporting implications arising from corporate acquisitions.

The Determinants of Value and Price

The principal determinants of the ‘value’ (normally defined as ‘fair market value’) of a particular business are the:

  • cash flows that a business prospectively is expected to generate. In this regard, cash flows normally are defined as ‘discretionary cash flows’, determined net of capital expenditures, working capital requirements, and income taxes1; and
  • rate of return (normally defined as a ‘discount rate’ or ‘capitalization rate’) applied against those cash flows, which rate reflects the time value of money as well as the opportunities and risks of a particular business and the industry in which it operates.

Cash flows and rates of return are directly interrelated. All things equal, more optimistic cash flow projections command a higher rate of return (or a lower multiple, being the inverse of the rate of return) in order to reflect the higher level of risk involved. As a simplistic example, if a business was expected to generate discretionary cash flows of $1 million per annum, and assuming that a 10% rate of return (‘capitalization rate’) was considered appropriate, then the ‘value’ of the business would be calculated at $10 million (being $1 million divided by 10%). Furthermore, if $10 million were believed to be the ‘correct’ value of the business, that figure could also be arrived at assuming annual cash flows of $1.2 million with a 12% capitalization rate, or $900,000 with a 9% capitalization rate, or an infinite number of other combinations.

It is important to note that the ‘value’ of a business as calculated by the purchaser or the vendor may be considerably different that the ‘price’ that will be paid for that business in an open market transaction. Open market prices are influenced by factors such as the forms of payment used, the negotiating position and abilities of the parties involved, and numerous other factors that may only come to light when the business is exposed for sale in the open market. That said, a purchaser normally begins by estimating the ‘value’ of an acquisition target to it, and then making adjustments to that value to reflect such things as the:

  • terms of the transactions, including the forms of payment that will be offered;
  • perceived importance of the acquisition target to the purchaser, including alternatives available to it;
  • purchaser’s perception of its negotiating position relative to that of the vendor; and
  • post-acquisition synergies that are believed to be available to the purchaser, the likelihood that such synergies will be realized, and the extent to which the purchaser perceives such synergies would be available to other interested parties.

When determining the ‘value’ of an acquisition target, a purchaser normally adopts a ‘discounted cash flow’ (‘DCF’) valuation methodology, as illustrated in the chart below2. Assuming that credible financial projections exist, the DCF methodology typically is the most conceptually sound approach as it considers prospective operating results of the acquisition target on an annual basis, and the required rate of return given the risks embedded in those cash flows.

In many cases, the valuation conclusions arrived at pursuant to a DCF methodology are ‘tested’ against ‘comparable company transactions’ that have occurred in recent years involving businesses whose operations are believed to be similar to those of the target company. For example, ‘multiples’ of trailing EBIT-DA (‘earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization’) imputed from the DCF value conclusions are compared to similar EBIT-DA multiples observed in recent open market transactions involving ‘comparable’ companies in the same industry.

The difficulty encountered when examining comparable company transaction multiples stems from the limited availability of important information regarding the particulars of the transaction that may have significantly influenced the observed multiples. Every transaction is unique, and without the benefit of direct involvement in a particular open market transaction it typically is not possible to assess such things as the:

  • impact the terms of the deal had on the price that ultimately was paid;
  • relative negotiating strength and negotiating ability of the purchaser and the vendor; and
  • extent to which the purchaser perceives that post-acquisition synergies may be available, and the extent to which those synergies were ‘paid for’.

As a result, while multiples observed in recent open market transactions may be considered in the context of a particular acquisition exercise, over-reliance on such an approach may be detrimental to the purchaser, the vendor, or both.

When dealing with 100% of the outstanding shares or net assets of a business that is valued on the assumption that it will continue to operate as a going concern, and post-acquisition synergies are expected, the two possible components that comprise any given open market price are:

  • that reflective of the value of all of the outstanding shares or net operating assets of the business viewed on a stand-alone basis. That is, the value of the business interest assuming the business will continue to operate ‘as is’, absent a divestiture of all or part of it. This value component often is referred to as intrinsic value. Intrinsic value is comprised of three distinct components where the business is viewed on a stand-alone basis. These are:
    • tangible operating assets, net of liabilities, required to carry on the business,
    • identifiable intangible assets (if any), which may include brand names, patents, copyrights, franchise agreements, trademarks, and so on, and
    • where applicable, goodwill, being the aggregation of non-identifiable (or ‘non-specific’) intangible assets, and identifiable intangible assets not otherwise accounted for; and
  • an incremental value over intrinsic value perceived by a purchaser at the time of acquisition comprised of post-acquisition synergies and/or strategic advantages (collectively referred to hereafter simply as ‘synergies’). The quantification of this incremental value is unique to each potential purchaser. Examples include incremental revenue opportunities, cost savings and overall risk reduction that the purchaser expects will result from combining the acquired business with its existing operations. Purchasers who anticipate synergies often are referred to as ‘special interest purchasers’. The combination of intrinsic value and post-acquisition synergies sometimes is referred to as 'Special Interest Purchaser Price’.

The components of 'intrinsic value' and 'Special Interest Purchaser Price' are summarized in the chart below.


Although the tangible assets of a business often can be valued separately, it is considerably more difficult to assess the value of a particular intangible operating asset. Further, the value of goodwill can rarely be quantified in isolation. Traditionally, when reference was made to the specific amount of goodwill inherent in a business, that amount normally was derived by deducting the estimated ‘value in use’ of the net tangible assets from overall ‘going concern value’. Stated differently, in practice values for intangibles and goodwill seldom were segregated, but rather were aggregated and together referred to as ‘goodwill’ or generic ‘intangible value’. This practice may change pursuant to newly introduced accounting standards in the U.S. and Canada regarding ‘Goodwill and other Intangible Assets’ which require certain intangible assets be separately quantified for accounting purposes (see discussion under ‘Public Entity Purchasers’).

The quantification of post-acquisition synergies generally should be a separate and distinct component of any business valuation or pricing exercise. Accordingly, the intrinsic value of the business should be estimated as the ‘base value’ and the value of synergies should be added to that base where applicable. This segregation not only assists in evaluating the reasonableness of the components, but in an open market transaction enables the purchaser separately to consider the portion of the anticipated synergies it wants to ‘pay for’ in its pricing strategy. Where a purchaser does not pay for expected synergies, these serve to compensate for unanticipated shortfalls from expected post-acquisition discretionary cash flows. No acquisition review can be so complete as to eliminate all post-acquisition surprises. In many instances, a lower level of post-acquisition benefits and a higher level of costs materialize following acquisition than were anticipated during negotiations. Consequently, if the value-added component is fully paid for, the purchaser has eliminated all downside protection and the likelihood of acquisition success is reduced.

A proper quantification of post-acquisition synergies requires a balanced, realistic perspective of the potential benefits to be derived from the acquisition, as well as an assessment of the likely incremental costs to be incurred in their realization. A discussion of the quantification of synergies is beyond the scope of this paper3. In most open market transactions involving medium and large sized businesses, one or more purchasers perceive the ability to realize post-acquisition synergies. It is unusual for a vendor to be paid fully for all purchaser-perceived post-acquisition net economic benefits. As indicated in the chart below4, while corporate acquirers normally consider the benefits of post-acquisition synergies when assessing the value of an acquisition target, in most cases only a portion of those synergies are ‘paid for’.

Value-Based Pricing Strategy

The determination of ‘value’ pursuant to a DCF methodology (or other valuation methodology) normally represents a ‘cash equivalent’ price. Few deals are consummated in cash on closing.

As a minimum, purchasers normally insist on retaining a portion of the purchase price for a specified period of time in the form of a holdback to offset certain risks such as undisclosed liabilities that existed at the transaction date.

When structuring a transaction, purchasers sometimes use forms of payment other than cash and holdbacks, including vendor take-backs, share exchanges, and earn-out arrangements.

Furthermore, the terms of the deal may incorporate other important elements such as fact-specific vendor representations and warranties, non-competition agreements, and management contracts.

All of these things serve to shift the risks and rewards of the transaction between the purchaser and the vendor, and as such, they can have a significant influence on the price that ultimately is paid. Understanding the ‘value dynamics’ of the various forms of consideration and the terms of the deal is essential to the development of a ‘value-based pricing strategy’.

From the standpoint of a purchaser, the essence of a value-based pricing strategy involves matching (to the extent practical) the risk and reward dynamics of an acquisition with the terms of the deal and the forms of payment that are used. This requires an understanding of the:

  • underlying determinants of business value and price (see previous discussion);
  • risks inherent in a particular acquisition; and
  • value parameters of the terms of the deal and forms of consideration.

A purchaser normally views acquisition risk as the failure of an acquired entity to generate sufficient post-transaction cash flows to provide it with a rate of return that is equal to or greater than its cost of capital when measured against the purchase price. An acquisition that generates a rate of return below a purchaser’s cost of capital results in an erosion of shareholder value. A shortfall in cash flows following an acquisition may be due to such things as:

  • unanticipated cash outflows needed to shore up aging or inadequate capital equipment that was not detected during the due diligence phase, or to compensate for a deficiency in working capital where the assets acquired are not realized on a timely basis, or where ‘hidden’ liabilities are uncovered;
  • revenues generated following the transaction are less than expected. Revenue shortfalls tend to be more common where sales growth had been anticipated (based on the expectation of increased market share, new customers, and so on) as opposed to the existing (or ‘baseline’) revenues of the business;
  • higher operating costs than anticipated due to (for example) the need to add employees or cost infrastructure to support the existing operations of the business, or those required in order to achieve sales growth expectations;
  • higher financing costs due to increasing interest rates where a portion of the purchase price was financed with floating-rate debt; and
  • the failure to realize post-acquisition synergies to the extent anticipated.

In order to help offset these risks, purchasers may be able to ‘match’ the risk/reward parameters of the acquisition with the payoff from various forms of consideration. That is, the ‘cost’ of the various forms of consideration used (and hence the acquisition price) should increase where the returns are realized by the purchaser, and should decrease where post-acquisition returns are less than anticipated. For example:

  • holdbacks and vendor take-backs can be used to offset some of the risk that the underlying tangible assets acquired are not realized to the extent anticipated (e.g. accounts receivable), or where ‘hidden liabilities’ are uncovered following the transaction;
  • where a share for share exchange is used, and where the vendor will own a meaningful percentage of the consolidated operations following the transaction, it may be possible to ‘match’ some of the intangible value components. From the standpoint of a public entity purchaser, the ‘pay-off’ from intangible value (such as brand names, customer lists, goodwill, and so on) generally is realized in the form of the multiples applied to the reported operating results of the consolidated entity by the public equity markets (hence influencing its share price). By matching the value components of the purchaser’s (publicly traded) shares, and the vendor’s (public or private) shares, the purchaser will cause the vendor’s interests to be aligned with its own, as the vendor will participate in the upside (or suffer the consequences of the downside) where the market perceives that intangible values are increasing (decreasing); and
  • earn-out structures are sometimes used where a large component of the total price paid is attributable to the growth prospects of the business, or where substantial post-acquisition synergies are anticipated. An earn-out effectively transfers the risk of non-performance from the purchaser to the vendor given that the price is reduced if anticipated results are not realized. Where the purchaser pays for the earn-out component, it normally does so with resources that it has already realized through the acquisition.

In addition to the various forms of consideration, other aspects of the deal can be structured so as to offset acquisition risks assumed by the purchaser. For example, where possible the purchaser should obtain:

  • fact-specific vendor representations and warranties that serve to protect the underlying net asset base being acquired against unforeseen liabilities. However, vendor representations and warranties should not be relied upon by a purchaser as a substitute for adequate due diligence;
  • a non-competition agreement from the vendor so as to protect the intrinsic value of the acquired business’ intangible assets, such as its customer base, technology, key employees, and so on; and
  • management contracts that provide the vendor with upside potential where it helps to generate post-acquisition revenue growth and synergy realization in the acquired business, which things will accrue to the benefit of the purchaser.

While in theory a value-based pricing structure may be desirable, it is not always possible to implement in practice. Open market transactions are influenced by a myriad of factors, including the expectations of purchasers and vendors and the alternatives available to each. In addition, the dynamics of the negotiations will influence the price paid and the terms of the deal. The likelihood that a purchaser can achieve a value-based pricing structure increases where the:

  • vendor’s negotiating position is relatively weak compared to that of the purchaser, due to the absence of attractive alternatives for the vendor; and
  • purchaser’s negotiating abilities are strong, and it can effectively convey to the vendor the benefits and attractiveness of a deal that adopts a ‘value-based pricing’ concept.

It is unfortunate that, in many cases, the quantitative mechanics of a transaction overshadow the importance of negotiation skills, which are essential in structuring a transaction that makes sound economic sense, and that is viewed by all parties to be a fair and reasonable arrangement.

Public Entity Purchasers

Transactions undertaken by companies whose securities are publicly traded undergo greater scrutiny by investors and the market as a whole. While prospective cash flow remains the key economic driver, public entities typically are concerned with how a particular transaction will influence their prospective earnings per share. This is because the ‘price-earnings ratio’ generally remains an important determinant of the trading price of publicly held securities. Public entity acquirers usually are apprehensive about undertaking an acquisition that will result in a near-term dilution in their earnings per share, even if the transaction is economically sound. Accounting rules tend to have an influence on both the price that public company purchasers are prepared to pay for a particular acquisition target, as well as how the transaction is structured.

Effective January 2002, new accounting regulations were introduced in both the U.S. and Canada pertaining to business combinations, goodwill, and intangible assets. While a comprehensive discussion of these regulations is beyond the scope of this paper, some of the more important changes are:

  • the ‘purchase method’ of accounting must be used to consolidate subsidiary companies, as opposed to the ‘pooling of interests method’, which is no longer permitted5. The ‘pooling of interests’ method was popular because it allowed a purchaser to avoid having to recognize goodwill amortization and higher depreciation following an acquisition, which costs would otherwise contribute to an erosion of consolidated earnings per share;
  • goodwill created pursuant to a transaction (being the difference between the total purchase price and the ‘fair value’ of the tangible and identifiable intangible assets acquired, net of liabilities assumed) no longer has to be amortized for accounting purposes. Previously, goodwill was amortized over a period of up to 40 years, which served to reduce consolidated earnings per share following the transaction. While the amortization of goodwill is no longer necessary, the new accounting rules require an annual ‘goodwill impairment test’ to determine whether the goodwill of the acquired business still exists. If it does not, the amount of ‘impairment’ is charged to earnings in the current period; and
  • certain intangible assets acquired must be segregated for accounting purposes. Such intangibles generally are defined as are those that arise from contractual or legal rights, or those that are capable of being segregated from the business and sold. Intangibles that meet the prescribed definition must be amortized over their expected lives, which in some cases may be short-lived. Depending on the nature and extent of such intangibles, a purchaser may have to recognize substantial amortization expense in the years following the acquisition. All other intangibles are not segregated for accounting purposes, and are classified as part of ‘goodwill’ – which is not amortized (as discussed above).

As a result of these (and other) changes, many public entity acquirers will seek to ‘manage’ their financial statements by structuring transactions in a way that allows them to report favourable consolidated earnings per share. Unfortunately, the structure of a transaction designed based on financial accounting regulations is not necessarily consistent with a structure developed based on sound underlying economic fundamentals.

Finally, public entity acquirers also should consider the nature and extent of their disclosure of acquisitions, both in the notes to the financial statements as well as in the ‘management discussion and analysis’ (‘MD&A’) section of the annual report, which typically precedes the financial statements. Formal accounting regulation disclosure requirements relating to acquisitions are relatively superficial in both the U.S. and Canada. As a result, purchasers often are able to ‘bury’ important (or possibly damaging) information about the transactions that they have undertaken. Companies in the U.S. that are subject to S.E.C. regulations are less able to take advantage of this due to the supplementary disclosure requirements designed to keep investors more informed.

The contents of MD&A essentially are unregulated today, although several professional bodies have published guidelines on what they believe should (or should not) be included. Management often takes advantage of MD&A disclosures since it is loosely regulated, and many investors afford it equal (or perhaps greater) weight than the audited financial statements. In light of the potential for investors to be mislead (either intentionally or unintentionally) regarding the costs and expected benefits of an acquisition due to the contents of MD&A disclosure, it is possible that this area will become more regulated in the coming years.


Business values are driven by prospective cash flows and rates or return. Purchasers normally estimate the value of an acquisition target pursuant to a DCF valuation methodology, supplemented with some consideration of ‘comparable company transactions’. Embedded in the overall value conclusion is a component of underlying net tangible assets, the intangible assets of a business including its ‘stand-alone’ goodwill, and post acquisition synergies. The determination of synergies normally is a separate element of the valuation process. In addition, the degree to which a purchaser ‘pays for’ synergies normally is discounted in light of the risks inherent in their realization.

Purchasers sometimes use various forms of consideration to consummate a transaction, including holdbacks, vendor take-backs, share exchanges, and earn-outs, in addition to (or in lieu of) cash at closing. Understanding the value dynamics of alternate forms of consideration is fundamental to developing a value-based pricing strategy. In essence, purchasers should attempt to align the risk and reward parameters of the acquisition target with the risks and reward parameters of the forms of consideration. Such ‘matching’ can also be done with other aspects of the transaction, including fact-specific vendor representations and warranties, non-competition agreements, and management contracts. By developing a ‘value-based pricing’ strategy, corporate acquirers will be more likely to ‘pay for value realized’, and increase the likelihood that an acquisition will generate an adequate rate of return measured in terms of its post-acquisition cash flows against the purchase price.

Implementing a value-based pricing strategy not only requires an understanding of the economic variables in an acquisition, but also a favourable negotiating position and sound negotiating abilities that can be used to create a win-win scenario.

Finally, when structuring a transaction, public entity purchasers typically are concerned with how the transaction will be reflected from a financial reporting standpoint, given the potential impact of such things on the market price of their shares following the transaction. New accounting rules recently introduced in the U.S. and Canada likely will have an influence on transaction structuring for public entity purchasers, and on the prices that they are willing to pay.


1 Discretionary cash flow normally is determined before debt servicing costs (interest and principal repayment). The costs and benefits of financing normally are incorporated in the rate of return applied to the discretionary cash flows.

2 Source: A Survey of Corporate Acquirers, April 1999, Campbell Valuation Partners Limited. A complete copy of the study is available at

3 An extensive discussion of the quantification of synergies can be found in The Valuation of Business Interests, Ian R. Campbell, Howard E. Johnson, Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants, 2001.

4 Source: A Survey of Corporate Acquirers, Campbell Valuation Partners Limited, April 1999.

5 This change will have a greater impact on U.S. companies, which were more readily able to adopt the Pooling of Interests method as contrasted to Canadian companies where the accounting rules governing the use of the Pooling of Interests method were more stringent.

This document is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship. You should not act or rely on any information in this document without first seeking legal advice. This material is intended for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. If you have any specific questions on any legal matter, you should consult a professional legal services provider.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Contact the Author?
Click here to email the Author
In Association with
In Partnership with
Other Canada Advice Centres
Competition and Antitrust
Mergers and Acquisitions
Labour and Employment
More Advice Centers
Useful Resources
CBVs are experts in their field. The following articles and papers have been written by CBVs, several articles have been featured in various national publications.
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.