ARTICLE
15 February 2018

Observations From The Eco Oro Proxy Contest

ML
McMillan LLP

Contributor

McMillan is a leading business law firm serving public, private and not-for-profit clients across key industries in Canada, the United States and internationally. With recognized expertise and acknowledged leadership in major business sectors, we provide solutions-oriented legal advice through our offices in Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto, Ottawa, Montréal and Hong Kong. Our firm values – respect, teamwork, commitment, client service and professional excellence – are at the heart of McMillan’s commitment to serve our clients, our local communities and the legal profession.
Today marks the first anniversary of the start of what was likely the most acrimonious proxy fight in Canada in 2017.
Canada Corporate/Commercial Law

Today marks the first anniversary of the start of what was likely the most acrimonious proxy fight in Canada in 2017. On February 10, 2017, Harrington Global Opportunities Fund Ltd. and Courtenay Wolfe 1 (collectively, the "Shareholder Group") requisitioned a shareholders' meeting to replace each of the six incumbent directors of Eco Oro Minerals Corp. ("Eco Oro" or the "Company"). On August 1, 2017, following nine separate proceedings2 brought before courts and securities regulators, the parties announced a settlement agreement that put an end to the proxy contest. In this paper, we will highlight some of the key findings arising out of the various proceedings, relating to the Company's impugned issuance of common shares, and will discuss the main takeaways and the practical implications for issuers, investors and securities law practitioners.3

Click here to download full publication; Observatons From The Eco Oro Proxy Contest.pdf

Footnotes

1 McMillan LLP represented the Shareholder Group.

2 These actions related to, among other things, allegations of acting jointly or in concert and defamation, relief sought to cease-trade options, relief sought under section 186 of the Business Corporations Act (British Columbia) SBC 2002, c 57 [the BCBCA] and separately under section 228 of the BCBCA and relief to reverse a share issuance.

3 The opinions expressed herein, particularly under the heading "Observations and Implications", are those of the authors and not McMillan LLP or its clients.

The foregoing provides only an overview and does not constitute legal advice. Readers are cautioned against making any decisions based on this material alone. Rather, specific legal advice should be obtained.

© McMillan LLP 2018

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More