ARTICLE
27 February 2025

Material Adverse Change (MAC) Clause Dispute In Nigeria

BH
Balogun Harold

Contributor

Balogun Harold is a specialist law firm for investment and financing transactions focused on Africa. We routinely undertake debt finance, private equity, project finance, venture capital, market entry and technology transactions on behalf of clients. We deliver proven, guaranteed and exceptional outcomes by always aiming for the best level of legal and transactional support necessary to achieve our clients' strategic goals.

The client/investor had entered into a Share Purchase Agreement ("SPA") to acquire a minority stake in a technology company. The SPA included a Material Adverse Change (MAC) clause, which allowed the investor...
Nigeria Corporate/Commercial Law

The client/investor had entered into a Share Purchase Agreement (“SPA”) to acquire a minority stake in a technology company. The SPA included a Material Adverse Change (MAC) clause, which allowed the investor to terminate the transaction if a significant deterioration in the target company’s business occurred before closing. Unfortunately, the target company reported a substantial revenue decline and loss of key customers before closing.

The investor sought to invoke the Material Adverse Change clause to withdraw from the deal, but the seller disputed the claim. The seller argued that the losses were due to broader changes in the economic conditions in Nigeria and not issues specific to the company.

A. Key Issues & Challenges

Amongst others, the SPA contained a broadly worded Material Adverse Change clause and also lacked precise financial thresholds or objective criteria for triggering termination. The seller relied on this ambiguity and threatened the investor with litigation for breach of contract. Being a new investor in frontier markets, the Investor was keen to avoid damage to its reputation and to future deal making opportunities but was not willing to proceed with the deal.

B. Approach and Outcome

In advising on the matter, we identified the ambiguities in the Material Adverse Change clause and guided the parties toward an objective assessment of the broader economic conditions, which the seller claimed had caused the losses. Recognizing the need for an impartial evaluation, both sides agreed to jointly appoint an independent accounting firm.

Subsequently, the accounting firm conducted a financial analysis of the target company, benchmarking its revenue trends against industry standards. Their findings confirmed that the losses stemmed from industry-wide challenges rather than company-specific operational failures—aligning with the investor’s original position.

Based on the report of the accounting firm, we supported the investor to advance good faith negotiations, which led to a purchase price adjustment. This way, the parties were able to effectively account for lost revenue and were able to close the deal on mutually acceptable terms.

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.

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