ARTICLE
6 April 2018

Proposed Delaware Amendments Would Limit Appraisal Rights In Two-Step Mergers

AO
A&O Shearman

Contributor

A&O Shearman was formed in 2024 via the merger of two historic firms, Allen & Overy and Shearman & Sterling. With nearly 4,000 lawyers globally, we are equally fluent in English law, U.S. law and the laws of the world’s most dynamic markets. This combination creates a new kind of law firm, one built to achieve unparalleled outcomes for our clients on their most complex, multijurisdictional matters – everywhere in the world. A firm that advises at the forefront of the forces changing the current of global business and that is unrivalled in its global strength. Our clients benefit from the collective experience of teams who work with many of the world’s most influential companies and institutions, and have a history of precedent-setting innovations. Together our lawyers advise more than a third of NYSE-listed businesses, a fifth of the NASDAQ and a notable proportion of the London Stock Exchange, the Euronext, Euronext Paris and the Tokyo and Hong Kong Stock Exchanges.
Since its adoption in 2013, parties have been using a two-step merger structure facilitated by §251(h) of Delaware's General Corporation Law (the DGCL) as a means of avoiding ...
United States Corporate/Commercial Law
A&O Shearman are most popular:
  • within Insurance, Real Estate and Construction and Environment topic(s)

Since its adoption in 2013, parties have been using a two-step merger structure facilitated by §251(h) of Delaware's General Corporation Law (the DGCL) as a means of avoiding the requirement of calling a special meeting of stockholders, thereby reducing the time between signing and closing a transaction. A recently proposed amendment to§262 of the DGCL would eliminate an inconsistency that has persisted in the treatment of dissenters' appraisal rights in long-form mergers and two-step transactions. Will these changes make two-step transactions under§251(h) even more attractive to dealmakers going forward?

Background

Delaware law does not provide dissenting shareholders with appraisal rights in transactions that are effected pursuant to a "long-form" merger (in which the target company calls a special meeting for purposes of obtaining shareholder approval), so long as the consideration paid to the target's shareholders consists solely of stock that is listed on a national securities exchange or is held by more than 2,000 holders. This is the "market out" exception.

However, as currently written, Delaware law does not extend the "market out" exception to two-step mergers effected pursuant to§251(h), in which the target company is acquired without the need for a stockholder vote following a tender offer.

A proposed amendment to the DGCL on March 20, 2018 is designed to eliminate this inconsistency. Under the proposed amendments, the same "market out" exception that applies to long-form mergers would apply to short form mergers effected pursuant to§251(h) – i.e., in stock-for-stock deals.

Our View

We have noted that it is exceedingly uncommon for stock-for-stock transactions to be effected as a two-step tender offer/merger under§251(h). One of the possible reasons for this (in addition to the desire to invoke Corwin) is the insulation from appraisal claims that a long form merger offers (and that a two-step transaction does not). By eliminating this discrepancy, the proposed amendments to the DGCL potentially increase the utility of the§251(h) two-step merger structure. That said, in a stock-for-stock transaction, the acquiror will be required to register its shares on Form S-4 (or Form F-4), and often will not commence the exchange offer until after its registration statement has cleared SEC comments. This SEC review process could potentially erode the timing advantage that a two-step transaction structure could otherwise have offered the parties, unless the buyer elects to do an "early commencement" of the offer. It will be interesting to see whether the proposed amendments result in more widespread adoption by dealmakers of §251(h) transaction structures.

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