Delaware law to allow big investors greater sway over US corporate
boards
Send a link to a friend
[June 25, 2024] By
Tom Hals
WILMINGTON, Delaware (Reuters) - Delaware is poised to adopt changes to
its widely used corporate law that critics argue could weaken U.S.
boards of directors in favor of influential investors such as
private-equity firms.
State lawmakers last week approved a bill that gives a corporation the
authority to enter into contracts with one or more shareholders that
give the investors power over key board decisions.
The approval followed an unusually contentious debate that included
warnings from state judges and academics, who said legislators were
rushing ahead without understanding the potential impact.
"This is a radical change in Delaware law," Usha Rodrigues, a law
professor from the University of Georgia, one of more than a dozen
opponents who spoke at a senate hearing on June 11.
Governor John Carney has said he will sign Senate Bill 313, which
addresses three recent rulings by the Delaware Court of Chancery. It
will become law Aug. 1.
The court plays a key role in interpreting the state's corporate law.
Most U.S. public companies are chartered in the state and related fees
provide around one-third of Delaware's general budget revenue.
The bill comes at a difficult moment for the court, which has been
criticized repeatedly by Tesla CEO Elon Musk for voiding his
compensation and by political conservatives for allegedly emphasizing
social issues above investment returns.
The bill enshrines a common practice known as stockholder agreements
that a court ruling called into question.
In February, Travis Laster, a Court of Chancery judge, invalidated a
stockholder agreement that gave Ken Moelis veto power over nearly every
significant decision by the board of Moelis & Co, an investment bank he
founded.
"The directors only manage the company to the extent (Ken)Moelis gives
them permission to do so," Laster wrote in his 133-page opinion.
Laster said the agreement violated a bedrock principle of Delaware law
that directors manage the business using their best judgment for the
benefit of all investors.
The ruling can be appealed and the bill excludes pending cases.
[to top of second column] |
Laster's ruling cast doubt on thousands of stockholder agreements
struck by venture capital and private-equity investors and touched
off a scramble in Delaware to amend the law.
"Investors have invested millions of dollars in corporations and
they don't know if the rights they have are valid," Srinivas Raju, a
Delaware corporate lawyer who helped draft the bill, told lawmakers.
The agreements are common among private companies and around 20% of
corporations that have gone public in recent years have done so
subject to a stockholder agreement, Gabriel Rauterberg, a law
professor at the University of Michigan, told Reuters.
Critics argue the agreements can be adopted without public
shareholder approval or consent.
Supporters said shareholders in public companies are on notice
because such agreements are disclosed in securities filings and
annual reports.
In addition, similar arrangements can be achieved by including them
in a certificate of incorporation or through preferred stock.
The court's chief judge, Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick, who wrote
two of the rulings that prompted the bill, and Laster have both
spoken against the rush to pass the legislation, in an unusual break
with tradition.
In response, William Chandler, a former chancellor on the court and
now with the Wilson Sonsini law firm, urged Delaware House members
to ignore academics and judges and follow the state bar, which
drafted the bill.
"At the moment the corporate market is not feeling too good about
Delaware because of the uncertainty and unpredictability of a few
decisions by just two judges," Chandler told lawmakers on June 20.
"Judges don't need to intrude upon the process of making law."
(Reporting by Tom Hals in Wilmington, Delaware; Editing by Noeleen
Walder and Rod Nickel)
[© 2024 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content.
|