Approval of the scheme - mergers and winding up, Business Law and Ethics

Approval of the scheme - mergers and winding up:

A scheme of arrangement was agreed between Hambros and Hellenic whereby the shareholders of Hellenic were to have their shares in the company cancelled in return for cash compensation.  Hambros was to pay the compensation and then receive the same number of shares in Hellenic.  The scheme was approved at a meeting of Hellenic by a majority in number of the shareholders holding three quarters in value of the shares involved.  But a wholly-owned subsidiary of Hambros (MIT) held 53% of the shares in Hellenic and voted for the scheme.  Hellenic applied for approval of the scheme and was opposed by a Greek Bank, a 14% shareholder in Hellenic.  Its objections were that it wished to retain its membership and also that the cash received for its shares would be subject to heavy capital gains tax liability in Greece.

The Greek bank opposed the approval of the scheme before the court on two grounds.  First, MIT as a subsidiary of Hambros had a different interest in the scheme from the other shareholders of Hellenic.  MIT was Hambros indirectly; it was seeking to acquire the 47% of Hellenic which it did not (through MIT) already own.  There should therefore have been a separate meeting of the holders of the 47% of Hellenic shares not already under the Hambros' control through MIT.  At such a meeting the Greek bank (with 14% out of 47%) could have prevented approval by the required three quarters majority.

Secondly, the purpose of the scheme was to enable Hambros to acquire 47% of the shares of Hellenic.  (The device of cancelling the shares for cash and issuing new ones to Hambros was to save the stamp duty payable on a straightforward transfer of the shares - an example of the advantages of a scheme of arrangement).

It was argued that a scheme of arrangement should not be used in a situation for which the take-over bid procedure was appropriate.  Under take-over bid rules the required 90% acceptance (from the independent shareholders) would not have been obtained since the Greek bank held more than one-tenth of the outstanding 47% minority shareholdings.

Posted Date: 1/15/2013 4:06:59 AM | Location : United States







Related Discussions:- Approval of the scheme - mergers and winding up, Assignment Help, Ask Question on Approval of the scheme - mergers and winding up, Get Answer, Expert's Help, Approval of the scheme - mergers and winding up Discussions

Write discussion on Approval of the scheme - mergers and winding up
Your posts are moderated
Related Questions
how do i answer a problem question in law base on the law of contract for final assesment

Patrick works in the same office as Marian and they do not work well together. One day, Marian got credit for a job well done and Patrick got angry over it. He walked int

Q. Show the Criminal conduct definition of phoenix activity? Master Builders argued that the definition of phoenix activity should focus on the existing sections of corporation

Effect of Ultra Vires Transaction:  An ultra vires transaction with a company may result in: a) a transfer of specific property to the company, or b) money being lent to

For this unit you will be given a hypothetical business situation, which is to be developed in line with statutory and voluntary compliance requirements to enable the business to o

UNSECURED ORDINARY DEBTS: A secured creditor obtains payment (to the extent that his security is adequate i.e. if it exceeds in value the amount owing to him) because he has a

Mrs. Rusholme occupied the firm of Saunders and Watts to refinish floors in assured rooms of a home owned by her and her husband in Red Deer, Alberta. She told Mr. Saunders that sh

What are the aspects  of  immunity  from  jurisdiction There  are  various  aspects  of  immunity  from  jurisdiction  and  state jurisdiction is often misunderstood with act o

Utmost Good Faith Whether a partnership is such contract of the chief good faith. Every one partner is entitled for utmost gaviness rom his co-partners. Therefore this equitab

The below is a scenario in which I have to make an IRAC for (not sure if you know what that is) but read the scenario and see if "Faye" is able to leave legally without ramificat