Yearly Archives: 2016

Institutional Investors and Class Action Tolling

Blair A. Nicholas is a senior and managing partner of Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, and David Kaplan is a senior counsel at the firm. This post is based on a Bernstein Litowitz publication by Mr. Nicholas and Mr. Kaplan.

Stock fraud, accounting scandals, and predatory behavior by investment banks have long plagued our nation’s financial markets. Fortunately, for over forty years, investors’ individual claims for recovery of damages under the U.S. securities laws have been protected and preserved by the filing of a securities class action. In 2013, however, a split emerged among the federal circuits regarding the scope of this class action “tolling” rule. That split, which recently deepened, has created great uncertainty and imposed heavy burdens on the institutional investor community.

READ MORE »

Does Combining the CEO and Chair Roles Cause Poor Firm Performance?

Harley Ryan is Associate Professor of Finance at Georgia State University. This post is based on a paper authored by Professor Ryan; Narayanan Jayaraman, Professor of Finance at Georgia Institute of Technology; and Vikram Nanda, Professor of Finance at the University of Texas at Dallas. Related research from the Program on Corporate Governance includes Learning and the Disappearing Association between Governance and Returns by Lucian Bebchuk, Alma Cohen, and Charles C. Y. Wang (discussed on the Forum here) and The Case for Increasing Shareholder Power by Lucian Bebchuk.

Considerable disagreement exists on the merits of CEO-Chair duality. In recent years, there has been growing regulatory and investor pressure to split the titles of CEO and Chairman of the Board. In fact, there is a significant trend towards separation of the two titles. However, the empirical evidence in the literature is inconclusive on the impact of separating these roles. We argue that the inconclusive evidence arises from endogenous self-selection that complicates empirical identification strategies and the ability to recognize the correct counterfactual firms.

READ MORE »

DOJ Declination Letters and the FCPA

Mark F. Mendelsohn is a partner at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP. This post is based on a Paul Weiss client memorandum by Mr. Mendelsohn, Alex Young K. Oh, Farrah R. Berse, Peter Jaffe, and Robby L. R. Saldaña.

The Department of Justice has publicly released its first declination letters since the launch of its FCPA Pilot Program two months ago. [1] The letters were sent to two companies, home-security and thermostat systems-maker Nortek, Inc. and internet-services provider Akamai Technologies, Inc., respectively, on June 3 and June 6. [2] Each company had been under investigation by the DOJ and SEC after voluntarily self-disclosing FCPA-related misconduct connected to corrupt payments to Chinese officials by their wholly-owned Chinese subsidiaries. Although it is clear that these two matters were self-reported prior to the effective date of the Pilot Program, the letters nonetheless offer an early window into the DOJ’s view as to when declination to prosecute is appropriate and presumably consistent with the goals of the FCPA Pilot Program.

READ MORE »

Pillars of Sustainability Leadership

Matteo Tonello is managing director at The Conference Board, Inc. This post is based on the Executive Summary of a Conference Board publication.

Business leaders increasingly recognize the sustainability imperative. They understand that the companies they lead cannot expect to be successful in the long term without considering the communities they work in and with and the natural environment they operate in and depend on. They understand global trends will ultimately reward companies that successfully balance their natural, social, and financial capitals, and that companies that fail to adapt to these global trends risk becoming irrelevant. The challenge is converting this recognition into action. How can business leaders prepare and steer their organizations for leadership in sustainability?

Input from senior executives at more than 80 member companies of The Conference Board sheds light on this question. Their collective input reveals leadership in corporate sustainability boils down to the following seven most impactful practices:

READ MORE »

Court’s Limitation of Timetable for SEC’s Claims for Disgorgement

Brad S. Karp is chairman and partner at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP. This post is based on a Paul Weiss client memorandum by Mr. Karp, Charles E. DavidowAudra J. SolowayAndrew J. Ehrlich, and Walter Rieman.

In SEC v. Graham, No. 14-13562 (11th Cir. May 26, 2016), the Eleventh Circuit held that the five-year statute of limitations applicable to SEC enforcement proceedings under 28 U.S.C. § 2462 applies to disgorgement and declaratory relief claims, but not to injunctive relief claims. The Eleventh Circuit reasoned that the backward-looking remedies of disgorgement and declaratory relief constitute a “civil fine, penalty or forfeiture” within the express meaning of the statute.

This decision addresses an area that has long been unsettled and has not yet reached the U.S. Supreme Court, namely, whether the SEC’s ability to obtain equitable, monetary relief in the form of disgorgement is subject to any statutory limitations period. By holding that disgorgement claims are extinguished under the five-year statute of limitations, the Eleventh Circuit has split with the D.C. Circuit, which has reached the opposite conclusion.

READ MORE »

Dell: Appraisal Award and Merger Price

Gail Weinstein is senior counsel in the corporate department at Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP. This post is based on a Fried Frank memorandum by Ms. Weinstein, Scott B. Luftglass, Robert C. Schwenkel, and Steven J. Steinman. This post is part of the Delaware law series; links to other posts in the series are available here.

In Appraisal of Dell Inc. (May 31, 2016), the Delaware Court of Chancery awarded an appraisal amount ($17.62) that was 30% higher than the price that was paid in the $25 billion merger ($13.75) in which Michael Dell (the founder, CEO, and 16% stockholder of Dell) and private equity firm Silver Lake Partners took Dell private. In the merger, Mr. Dell, having rolled over his equity and invested $750 million of cash, obtained 75% ownership of the company. The court utilized a discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis to appraise Dell’s “fair value” for appraisal purposes (i.e., the going concern value of Dell at the time of the merger, excluding the value of any expected synergies), having concluded that, in this case, the merger price was not a reliable indicator of fair value.

READ MORE »

The Indispensability of the Shareholder Value Corporation

Marc Moore is Reader in Corporate Law and Director of the Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law (3CL) at the University of Cambridge. This post is based on a recent paper by Dr. Moore. Related research from the Program on Corporate Governance includes The Case for Increasing Shareholder Power by Lucian Bebchuk.

Despite their differences of opinion on other issues, most corporate law and governance scholars have tended to agree upon one thing at least: that the overarching normative objective of corporate governance—and, by implication, corporate law—should be the maximization (or, at least, long-term enhancement) of shareholder wealth. Indeed this proposition—variously referred to as the “shareholder wealth maximization”, “shareholder value”, or “shareholder primacy” norm—is so ingrained within mainstream corporate governance thinking that it has traditionally been subjected to little serious policy or even academic question. However, the zeitgeist would appear to be slowly but surely changing. The financial crisis may not quite have proved the watershed moment it was initially heralded as in terms of resetting dominant currents of economic or political opinion. Nonetheless, in the narrower but still important domain of corporate governance thinking and policymaking, the past decade’s events have triggered the onset of what promises to be a potentially major paradigm shift in the direction of an evolving “Post-Shareholder-Value” (or “PSV”) consensus.

READ MORE »

Weekly Roundup: June 23–June 30, 2016


More from:

This roundup contains a collection of the posts published on the Forum during the week of June 23–June 30, 2016.




The Day After Brexit


SEC and Mining Disclosures


Golf Buddies and Board Diversity











Light at the End of the (Channel) Tunnel

Light at the End of the (Channel) Tunnel

Christopher Leonard is a partner in the London office of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. This post is based on an Akin Gump memorandum by Mr. Leonard, Ian Patrick Meade, and Tim Pearce. Related posts on the legal and financial impact of Brexit include Brexit: Possible Options and Impact, from Shearman & Sterling; Brexit: Legal Implications, from Sullivan & Cromwell LLP; The Day After Brexit, from Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP; The Legal Consequences of Brexit, from Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP; and Brexit: What Does the Vote Mean for Business?, from Shearman & Sterling LLP.

The decision to hold a referendum as to whether the United Kingdom (UK) should remain a member of the European Union (EU) introduced the term “Brexit” into the global political lexicon. Now that the UK has voted to leave the EU, the term has spawned new variations: will the UK’s departure be a “soft-Brexit” or a “hard-Brexit”?

Those advocating a soft-Brexit assume that the UK will be able to negotiate continued access to the EU’s single market in financial services, perhaps by agreeing to join the European Economic Area (EEA) (members of which accept certain laws of the EU, including in relation to financial services, in return for access to the single market).

If this turns out not to be possible, perhaps because EEA membership is simply not on offer or because the cost of becoming a member of the EEA is politically unacceptable (EEA membership entails the free movement of labour between EU and EEA member states, making a contribution to the EU budget and accepting laws over which the EEA member state has little say), the UK will have to contemplate the possibility of a “hard-Brexit,” in which it no longer has automatic access to the single market. Press coverage has assumed that UK financial institutions that currently rely on their EU “passports” to provide financial services to clients in the remaining EU Member States on a cross-border basis would have to relocate to a remaining member state.

READ MORE »

Engagement: New Imperatives

Paula Loop is Leader of the Governance Insights Center at PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. This post is based on a PwC publication by Ms. Loop and Catherine Bromilow.

Investors expect a new approach to engagement—one that covers important topics, meets their needs, and often involves directors. Companies with effective engagement programs are seizing the opportunity to build important relationships with long-term shareholders before crises hit. And they’re taking credit for them publicly, setting the bar higher for other companies. So how does your company measure up?
READ MORE »

Page 43 of 78
1 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 78