United States: February 2015 Corporate Alert

The Herrick Advantage

On March 13th, Herrick partners Irwin A. Kishner, John R. Goldman and Daniel A. Etna will speak at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law's 3rd Annual Sports Law Symposium. The event attracts high-profile guests from the NBA, MLB, NHL, NFL and MLS. Several panels will focus on the current issues impacting sports and law. For more information, please click here.

Delaware Chancery Court Awards $194 Million in Expectation Damages

The Delaware Chancery Court awarded PharmAthene, Inc., a pharmaceutical company, $194 million on its claim against SIGA Technologies, Inc., another pharmaceutical company, for failure to negotiate a drug license in good faith.  PharmAthene and SIGA executed a merger agreement which contained a provision that if the merger fell through, the parties would negotiate a drug license in good faith pursuant to the term sheet attached to the merger agreement.  SIGA subsequently terminated the merger agreement and, although the parties began negotiating the drug license, by that time, SIGA's overall financial position and business outlook had dramatically improved.  SIGA proposed license terms materially different from those contained in the term sheet.  In response, PharmAthene sued SIGA.

The Delaware Supreme Court held that SIGA had breached the covenant to negotiate in good faith by demanding terms that were not "substantially similar" to those contained in the term sheet. The Chancery Court initially awarded PharmAthene expectation damages. The Supreme Court found PharmAthene's evidence of expectation damages to be too speculative and remanded the case back to the Chancery Court for reconsideration.  In remanding the case, the Supreme Court ruled that expectation damages may be awarded only for losses that can be proven with reasonable certainty.

On remand, the Chancery Court awarded PharmAthene $194 million, such amount representing the present value of expected future profits from sales of the drug at issue.  In awarding expectancy damages to PharmAthene, the Chancery Court relied in part upon new evidence introduced since the commencement of the lawsuit that SIGA had entered into a contract to sell the drug at issue to the federal government.

The prior court proceedings in this case were reported in the November 2011 and June 2013 Corporate Alerts.

PharmAthene v. SIGA Technologies, Inc., C. A. No. 2627 - VCP (Del. Ch. Ct. Jan. 15, 2015)

Delaware Chancery Court Rules Interested Directors Are Not Controlling Stockholders

The Delaware Chancery Court ruled that the business judgment standard of review, rather than the heightened entire fairness standard, applied to a sale of assets transaction.  Under the transaction at issue, the company purchased assets from an entity controlled by two directors of the company.  The transaction, however, was approved by the company's audit committee consisting of the company's three other directors.

The claimants unsuccessfully argued that the heightened standard of review should apply because the two interested directors should be treated as controlling stockholders.  The interested directors owned less than 50% of the company's common stock.  The court, relying on two of its recent opinions, ruled that minority stockholders (such as the interested directors) should be viewed as controllers only in situations where they exercise actual control over the board of directors.  The court found no evidence was presented that the interested directors exerted actual control over the board of directors in connection with the asset sale.

In re Sanchez Energy Derivative Litig., No. 9132 - VCG (Del. Ch. Ct. Nov. 11, 2014)

Delaware Chancery Court Refuses to Apply Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing

The Delaware Chancery Court dismissed a breach of contract claim which arose under a patent purchase agreement.  The purchase of the patents was conditioned upon receipt of approval by an Israeli governmental agency.  Under the patent purchase agreement, such approval was to be on terms "satisfactory in the sole discretion (which for purposes of this condition shall not, to the extent permitted by law, be subject to the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing)" of the purchaser.  The court held that, under the agreement, whether the terms of the approval were satisfactory to Networks was "a decision that is unreviewable in the sense that, if it is timely taken, the defendant could then ... terminate." 

The seller under the patent purchase agreement argued unsuccessfully that the purchaser's exercise of its sole discretion was qualified by either (i) a "commercially reasonable efforts" standard contained in another provision of the agreement or (ii) a default good faith standard that could not be contracted away.  In ruling in favor of the purchaser, the court found as to the first argument that it was unreasonable to assume that the disclaimer of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing would result in the application of the higher "commercially reasonable efforts" standard.  With respect to the second argument, the court ruled that the provision's "language ... could not be any clearer," and that it was, in fact, "as clear as it gets."

Orckit Communications Ltd. v. Networks Inc. et al., C.A. No. 9658 (Del. Ch. Ct. Jan. 28, 2015)

Delaware Chancery Court Rules $112 Million Termination Fee Conditions Not Satisfied

The Delaware Chancery Court ruled that a target company was barred from seeking the $112 million reverse termination fee provided for in the merger agreement.  The court found that the target company had failed to satisfy all of the conditions to closing the merger.  After entering into the merger agreement, the target company experienced labor difficulties with both its Chinese and domestic labor unions. The foreign labor union dispute resulted in the cessation of operations for a significant period of time.  The domestic labor union claimed that the merger would require renegotiation of the collective bargaining agreement.  The acquirer sought to negotiate a new collective bargaining agreement with the domestic labor union, but failed to reach agreement.

The target company, alleging that the acquirer had failed to negotiate a new collective bargaining agreement in good faith, claimed that it was entitled to the $112 million reverse termination fee.  In response, the acquirer claimed that the target company was not entitled to such fee by reason of the target company not having satisfied all of the conditions to closing the merger.  In particular, the acquirer claimed that the target company breached a merger agreement covenant requiring the continued operation of each subsidiary of the target company in the ordinary course of business.  The target company argued that the covenant applied only to operations within its control.  

The court, in ruling in favor of the acquirer, held that the labor disputes prevented the target company from satisfying its merger closing conditions.  In so ruling, the court stated that "ordinary course" means "the normal and ordinary routine of conducting business," and that the labor disputes prevented compliance with the covenant at issue.

Cooper Tire & Rubber Company v. Apollo (Mauritius) Holdings Pvt. Ltd, C. A. No. 8980-VCG (Del. Ch. Ct. Oct. 31, 2014)

SEC Proposes Dodd-Frank Disclosure Rule for Company Hedging Policies

On February 9, 2015, the Securities and Exchange Commission issued proposed rules to enhance corporate disclosure of company hedging policies for directors, officers and other employees under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.  Under the proposed rules, companies would be required to disclose in their annual meeting proxy statements whether directors, officers and other employees are permitted to purchase financial instruments designed to hedge or offset any decrease in the market value of their equity securities.  The proposed rule requires only disclosure of such hedging activities.  The proposed rule does not require companies to prohibit hedging transactions or to adopt policies that address hedging activities.  According to the Securities and Exchange Commission, the purpose of the proposed rules is to provide transparency to shareholders about whether the directors, officers and employees of the issuer are permitted to engage in transactions that mitigate or avoid the incentive alignment associated with their equity ownership. 

Securities Act Rel. No. 33-9723 (Feb. 9, 2015)

U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Addresses Impact of Dodd-Frank Act upon Bank's Trust Preferred Securities

The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal of a breach of contract claim involving a trust indenture for a bank's trust preferred securities.  The claim arose out of the redemption of the trust preferred securities.  The indenture permitted the issuer to redeem the trust preferred securities upon the occurrence of a "Capital Treatment Event." Under the indenture, a "Capital Treatment Event" is the reasonable determination by the issuer that, as a result of the occurrence of any change (including any prospective change) in law, there is more than an insubstantial risk that the issuer will not be entitled to treat the trust preferred securities as "tier 1 capital" for purposes of the capital adequacy guidelines of the Federal Reserve.  The issuer redeemed the trust preferred securities in response to the passage of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act in July 2010.  This Act changes the law relating to trust preferred securities.  Under the Act, bank holding companies, such as the issuer, would no longer be permitted to use trust preferred securities as tier 1 capital beginning in 2013.  The trustee unsuccessfully argued that the issuer breached the indenture by redeeming the trust preferred securities in advance of the effective date of the Act's trust preferred securities provision.  The court, relying on the express language of the indenture, focused upon the inclusion of prospective changes in law within the definition of Capital Treatment Event.      

Turkle Trust v. Wells Fargo & Company, D.C. No. 4:11-cv-06494-CW (U.S. Ct. of Appeals (9th Cir.) Feb. 10, 2015)

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

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

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

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
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
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

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 or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq 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 of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions