United States: IPO Prospectuses: Avoiding And Responding To Common SEC Comments

This practice note examines some of the issues most commonly raised in initial Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) comment letters on registration statement filed for initial public offering (IPOs). It is intended to guide you, as counsel to an IPO company, in assisting your client in efficiently navigating the SEC comment and review process.

This practice note discusses comments that apply to IPO prospectuses generally, including comments on plain English principles and expert consent requirements, and comments on specific sections of a prospectus, including the risk factors, management's discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations, and others. It provides excerpts from, and links to, representative SEC comment letters, and offers drafting and other tips to help issuers avoid receiving these types of comments or, failing that, to respond effectively to the SEC's concerns.

This practice note does not provide a comprehensive list of the types of comments that the staff of the SEC's Division of Corporation Finance (SEC staff or staff) can issue, and does not address SEC staff comments on executive compensation disclosure, which has become less important since the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012 (JOBS Act) enabled emerging growth company (EGCs) to provide less detailed executive compensation disclosures in their registration statements, which most EGCs undertaking IPOs have done. It also does not discuss financial statement and related accounting issues, which are typically addressed by the issuer's chief financial officer and its outside auditor. SEC staff comments can vary widely from offering to offering and depend on the issuer's industry sector, the stage of the issuer's business, and the issuer's financial condition. Accordingly, each issuer must draft its IPO prospectus disclosures to accurately reflect its own unique facts and circumstances.

For information about preparing the registration statement and prospectus for an IPO, see Registration Statement and Preliminary Prospectus Preparations for an IPO, Top 10 Practice Tips: Drafting a Registration Statement, and Form S-1 Registration Statements. For information about the IPO process, see Initial Public Offering Process. For information generally on responding to SEC comment letters and the SEC staff review process, see SEC Comment Letter Responses and Understanding the SEC Review Process.

SEC Review Process

After a company files a registration statement on Form S-1 (or Form F-1 for foreign private issuer), the SEC staff will perform a cover-to-cover review of the document to ensure compliance with the applicable disclosure and accounting requirements under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (Securities Act). The SEC staff does not evaluate the merits of an investment in an IPO but rather focuses on whether the disclosures provided in the registration statement provide investors with enough information to make an informed investment decision.

The SEC Staff's Comment Letter

Virtually all IPO registration statements receive comments. The SEC staff will generally issue a comment letter within 30 days from the date the registration statement is filed (whether submitted confidentially or publicly on EDGAR). According to the SEC's Fiscal Year 2016 Annual Performance Report, available at https://www.sec.gov/ files/secfy18congbudgjust.pdf, in 2016 the SEC staff issued initial comments within an average of 25.5 days.

The SEC staff's comments will include a description of any deficiencies identified in their review and may also include requests for supplemental information from the company if the staff believes the disclosures do not comply with SEC disclosure requirements or omit information that may be material to investors. Each comment letter is unique to the filing and may include comments that require substantial revisions to the registration statement. The number of comments in the SEC staff's initial comment letter can range from just a few to 70 or more. There may be several rounds of letters from the SEC staff and responses from the company until the issues identified in the staff's review are resolved.

Responding to SEC Staff Comment Letters

You should work with your client, underwriters' counsel, the company's auditor, and the other members of the IPO working group to carefully address each SEC staff comment in the company's response letter and in any amended registration statement filed with it.

When responding to the SEC, it is important to be mindful of your responses as they will eventually be made publicly available. If you do not fully understand a specific comment, you should contact the SEC staff reviewer for clarification so you can provide an appropriate response. Thoughtful, well-written response letters are crucial to resolve SEC staff comments efficiently. Responses should focus on the SEC staff's specific questions and cite the SEC's rules, guidance, and other authoritative sources (especially for accounting comments) wherever possible. Although it is helpful to review other registrants' response letters, a company's response letter should address its unique facts and circumstances. If an amendment to the registration statement is being filed with the response letter, the responses should indicate specifically where the revisions have been made to address the SEC staff's comments.

You should not assume that receiving a comment means that the SEC staff reviewer disagrees with the company's approach or disclosure. Often comments seek additional information and clarification to better understand the company's position. You should not, however, respond to a comment by adding disclosures to the registration statement that you believe to be immaterial. If you believe that a comment concerns an immaterial matter, you should communicate that to the SEC staff reviewer (legal or accounting) responsible for the comment as early as possible in the review process to avoid causing any delays in resolving the comment. The response letter should thoroughly explain the judgments the company applied in drafting such disclosure to assist the SEC staff in understanding why additional disclosure is not material to investors or necessary to comply with the disclosure requirements.

Generally, SEC comment letters request responses within 10 business days. However, if you believe more time is needed to respond to the comments, you should discuss this with the appropriate SEC staff reviewer.

Once all the SEC staff's comments on its registration statement have been resolved, the company can request that the SEC declare the registration statement effective, which allows it to proceed with the IPO. The SEC staff will upload its comment letters and the company's responses to EDGAR within 20 days of declaring the registration statement effective.

For additional information about the SEC review process, see Understanding the SEC Review Process.

To minimize the number of SEC staff comments on your client's registration statement, you should review staff comment letters and company response letters from recently completed IPOs in the same industry to identify industry-specific issues that the SEC staff may have, as well as IPOs for companies that have adopted similar accounting principles to identify any accounting-specific issues that the SEC staff is focused on. Foreign private issuers should also review SEC comment letters and company response letters from recently completed IPOs for issuers with the same country of domicile. However, many comments tend to fall under the recurring themes discussed below.

Common SEC Comments on IPO Prospect uses

The following types of comments apply to prospectuses generally.

Plain English

Rule 421 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.421) requires companies to use plain English writing principles in their prospectuses. Here are some examples of comments received by issuers that failed to do so:

"Throughout the prospectus numerous statements in your disclosure are unclear because they are not written in plain English or the concept is not fully described. Please review your entire prospectus to ensure that your disclosure throughout is written in plain English and the concepts that you describe are fully explained. See Rule 421(b) of Regulation C." (SEC Comment Letter to Achison Inc. (Sept. 20, 2016), Comment #1).

"Please note that the summary is subject to the plain English principles under Securities Act Rule 421(d). Revise to eliminate unnecessary redundancy. For example, the fourth paragraph in this section appears to repeat much of the information in the first paragraph." (SEC Comment Letter to UPAY, Inc. (Aug. 4, 2016), Comment #1).

"Throughout your registration statement you utilize industry jargon. For example purposes only, we note your reference to "commercial real estate CDOs" on page 6. Please concisely explain these terms where you first use them." (SEC Comment Letter to TPG RE Finance Trust, Inc. (May 24, 2017), Comment #3).

"Please revise to explain industry jargon to an investor not in your business, such as "technology white space," and eliminate marketing language." (SEC Comment Letter to Ameri Holdings, Inc. (Mar. 6, 2017), Comment #9).

To avoid this type of comment, you should write in short declarative sentences, use definite and concrete everyday language, use active voice, present complex information in tabular format, and avoid legal and industry jargon and double negatives. Descriptive headings and bullet lists are also recommended. If highly technical or legal jargon cannot be avoided, then you should include a glossary in the prospectus to facilitate the reader's understanding of the prospectus disclosure.

Eliminating Repetition

The SEC staff may comment if there is too much redundant information in the prospectus. The problem of repetitive disclosure most commonly arises in the summary section of the prospectus. Here is an example of this type of comment:

"Please identify those aspects of the offering and your company that are most significant, and highlight these points in plain, clear language. The summary should not, and is not required to repeat the detailed information in the prospectus. The detailed description of your business, competitive strengths, and strategy is unnecessary since you repeat them verbatim in the business section of the prospectus." (SEC Comment Letter to Valvoline Inc. (Jun. 27, 2016), Comment #2).

In preparing the summary section, you should avoid repeating too much information from the business section. The summary should highlight the most significant aspects of the company's business, with a lengthier description reserved for the business section. Item 503(a) of Regulation S-K (17 CFR 229.503) provides that the prospectus summary should be brief and provide an overview of the key aspects of the offering, and the SEC staff will object if it is too long. When drafting the summary, you and your client should consider and identify those aspects of the offering that are most significant and determine how to best highlight those points in clear, plain language.

Clarifying the Basis for the Issuer's Statements

Although the prospectus is, in part, a marketing tool, companies should avoid hyperbolic statements and marketing language. Statements of belief should be clearly labeled as such and be accompanied by an explanation of the basis for each belief. Companies should also be cognizant of potential liability under the federal securities laws for misstatements or omissions in the registration statement. Here are some examples of this type of comment:

"We note your statement that you believe Top Kontrol is "the most advanced anti-theft and personal safety automobile device of its kind currently available." Please expand here and in all applicable places in the document to disclose the nature of the Top Kontrol device, such as how it is installed and how it works. Please also better explain the basis for your belief that it is the "most advanced" of its kind currently available. In this regard, we note that on page 25 you compare Top Kontrol to Viper and LoJack. As each of Viper and LoJack offer multiple products with multiple features, please clarify to which of their products you are referring in making the comparison to Top Kontrol." (SEC Comment Letter to SecureTech Innovations, Inc. (Mar. 15, 2018), Comment #2).

"Disclose the basis for your assertion that nervonic acid "is known to be beneficial to memory related brain health, anti-aging, blood lipid regulation, and anti-fatigue symptoms." Disclose whether this information is based upon management's belief, industry data, reports/articles or any other source. In this regard, you state on page 14 that the benefits are claimed by studies. Elaborate upon the nature of these studies and whether you or a third party commissioned such studies." (SEC Comment Letter to CAT9 Group Inc. (Jan. 23, 2018), Comment #6).

To avoid comments on statements about a company's relative position in the industry, such as being a leader in a field, the company should disclose the relevant metric used for making the assertion, such as industrywide sales figures or, if possible, a third-party source. It should also be clear when a statement is made based on management's belief (i.e., "We believe that . . ."). Although phrasing a statement as a belief may weaken its impact, it can help companies avoid liability under federal securities laws for misstatements or omissions of material facts. If a company has a good faith basis for its belief or opinion, and does not omit any material facts necessary to make the statements not misleading, statements of belief and opinion should be insulated from liability under Section 11 of the Securities Act (15 U.S.C. § 77k). Additionally, a good faith belief can support a defense against claims asserted under Section 10(b) (15 U.S.C. § 78j) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (Exchange Act), and Rule 10b-5 thereunder (17 CFR 240.10b-5), which require proof of an intent to deceive, manipulate, or defraud to impose liability.

For more information about the liability under the federal securities laws of participants in IPOs, see Liability under the Federal Securities Laws for Securities Offerings and Liability for Securities Offerings Checklist.

The SEC staff may, nonetheless, ask for the company's basis for a statement of belief. When responding to such comments, the company should carefully review how the statement of belief is phrased and provide support where possible, as in this example:

SEC Comment:

"Please tell us the basis for your belief that your company is 'the only service available which is a patented methodology to effectively safeguard an individual's personal rights.'" (SEC Comment Letter to Right of Reply Ltd (Nov. 27, 2017), Comment #2).

Company response:

"We have amended our disclosure to state that the Company is "one of the only..." in lieu of "the only...". We have also attached as Exhibits A and B to this letter opinions of counsel for the Company which we believe supports the statement highlighted in your comment." (Response to SEC Comment Letter to Right of Reply Ltd. (Jan. 3, 2018), Response #2).

The SEC staff will also typically ask the company to provide copies of all sources cited in the prospectus:

"Please supplementally provide the report by the National Institute of Health Research in the United Kingdom referred to in this section." (SEC Comment Letter to OncoGenex Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (May 17, 2017), Comment #7).

"Please provide us with supplemental support for the factual assertions made throughout your prospectus. To the extent you do not have independent support for a statement, please revise the language to clarify the basis for the statement. In addition, to the extent that some of these statements are intended to be qualified to your belief, please revise your disclosure to state the basis, to the extent material, for your belief." (SEC Comment Letter to FTS International, Inc. (Jan. 31, 2017), Comment #7).

To facilitate a timely response, you should prepare copies of all relevant third-party reports in advance and clearly highlight the relevant portions of the reports that support the statements included in the prospectus. Third-party reports and other supplemental information submitted in response to SEC staff comments are generally not filed on EDGAR and thus will not be made publicly available.

Experts' Consents

Rule 436 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.436) requires that the written consent of any expert (e.g., the issuer's independent auditor) or counsel whose report is quoted or summarized in the prospectus be filed as an exhibit to the registration statement. Here are some examples of this type of comment:

"We note your response to comment 5 and your revised disclosure on page 12. It appears that this disclosure is being attributed to Savills PLC. Please provide an analysis as to why this third-party attributed disclosure is not expertized disclosure requiring a consent. Refer to Rule 436 of the Securities Act and Securities Act Compliance and Disclosure Interpretation Question 233.02." (SEC Comment Letter to Majulah Investment, Inc. (Oct. 23, 2017), Comment #2).

"We note your disclosure throughout that Egan-Jones has rated the CM Loan at "A+" and that you have rated the loan an "A." Please file the consent for the Egan-Jones Ratings Company, as required by Securities Act Rule 436. Alternatively, please remove the references to the credit rating. For further guidance, please consider our Securities Act Rules Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations Questions 233.04 and 233.05." (SEC Comment Letter to Korth Direct Mortgage, LLC (Sep. 8, 2017), Comment #13).

"We note references throughout your prospectus to third-party sources, such as Notch Consulting and ACT Research, for statistical, qualitative and comparative statements contained in your prospectus. Please provide us with copies of any materials that support third-party statements, appropriately marked to highlight the sections relied upon. Please also tell us if any reports were commissioned by you for use in connection with this registration statement and, if so, please file the consent as an exhibit. See Rule 436 of Regulation C of the Securities Act of 1933." (SEC Comment Letter to PQ Group Holdings Inc. (Jul. 7, 2017), Comment #4).

The SEC staff will not require a consent when the prospectus cites a publicly available report, but will require a consent when the report or other information was prepared by a third party at the company's request. Third parties may be reluctant to be deemed to be "experts" because experts are subject to liability under Section 11 of the Securities Act for any material misrepresentations in or omissions from their reports or other information included in the prospectus. Therefore, before filing your client's initial registration statement, you should determine whether any third-party information included in the prospectus will require a consent and whether the third party(ies) would be willing to deliver a consent.

If the company believes that an expert's consent is not required, it should explain its position in its response to the SEC:

SEC comment:

"We note your reference to a study commissioned by you and conducted by Millward Brown regarding your brand awareness among women in the United States. Please file the consent of the named researchers as an exhibit to your registration statement or provide us with your analysis as to why you do not believe you are required to do so. Refer to Rule 436 under the Securities Act." (SEC Comment Letter to Stitch Fix, Inc. (Nov. 1, 2017), Comment #2).

Company response:

"The Company respectfully submits that Millward Brown is not an "expert" under Rule 436. Rule 436 requires that a consent be filed if any portion of a report or opinion of an expert is quoted or summarized as such in a registration statement. Section 7 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, provides that an expert is "any accountant, engineer, or appraiser, or any person whose profession gives authority to a statement made by him." The Company respectfully submits that Millward Brown, the third party provider of this study, is not among the class of persons subject to Section 7 and Rule 436 as "experts" unless the Company expressly identifies such provider as an expert or the statements are purported to be made on the authority of such provider as an "expert." Accordingly, the Company believes that Millward Brown should not be considered an "expert" within the meaning of Rule 436 and the federal securities laws.

In addition, the Company notes that the consent requirements of Section 7 and Rule 436 are generally directed at circumstances in which an issuer has engaged a third party expert or counsel to prepare a valuation, opinion or other report specifically for use in connection with a registration statement. The information from this study included in the Amended Registration Statement was not prepared in connection with the Registration Statement or the Amended Registration Statement. In fact, the study was commissioned in November 2016, at which time the methodology, study details, key deliverables and price were set. As a result of the foregoing, the Company respectfully submits that the third party provider of this study is not an expert of the kind whose consent is required to be filed pursuant to Rule 436." (Response to SEC Comment Letter to Stitch Fix, Inc. (Nov. 6, 2017), Response #2).

In the example above, the company, through its outside counsel, responded to the SEC staff's comment citing the applicable rules to explain why an expert's consent was not needed.

To view the full article click here

Visit us at mayerbrown.com

Mayer Brown is a global legal services provider comprising legal practices that are separate entities (the "Mayer Brown Practices"). The Mayer Brown Practices are: Mayer Brown LLP and Mayer Brown Europe – Brussels LLP, both limited liability partnerships established in Illinois USA; Mayer Brown International LLP, a limited liability partnership incorporated in England and Wales (authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority and registered in England and Wales number OC 303359); Mayer Brown, a SELAS established in France; Mayer Brown JSM, a Hong Kong partnership and its associated entities in Asia; and Tauil & Chequer Advogados, a Brazilian law partnership with which Mayer Brown is associated. "Mayer Brown" and the Mayer Brown logo are the trademarks of the Mayer Brown Practices in their respective jurisdictions.

© Copyright 2018. The Mayer Brown Practices. All rights reserved.

This Mayer Brown article provides information and comments on legal issues and developments of interest. The foregoing is not a comprehensive treatment of the subject matter covered and is not intended to provide legal advice. Readers should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to the matters discussed herein.

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.

Authors
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
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
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
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.

Disclaimer

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.

General

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