Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 31 MAY 2012

Confidentiality Agreement Impedes Hostile Take-Over Bid

Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP
Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP
Contributor
Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP

Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP

As one of Canada’s top business law firms, Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP (Blakes) provides...

View firm profile
Explore more from Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP

In "Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. v. Vulcan Materials Company", Chancellor Strine of the Delaware Court of Chancery enjoined a hostile take-over bid.

CanadaCorporate/Commercial Law

In Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. v. Vulcan Materials Company, Chancellor Strine of the Delaware Court of Chancery enjoined a hostile take-over bid on the ground that confidentiality agreements between Martin Marietta, the bidder, and Vulcan, the target, prevented the bid. The judgment temporarily prevents Martin Marietta from acquiring Vulcan pursuant to a US$5.3-billion hostile bid, and from pursuing a proxy contest in which Martin Marietta was seeking the election of four of its nominees to Vulcan's board of directors. In support of his decision, Chancellor Strine cited the 2009 Ontario Superior Court of Justice decision, Certicom Corp. v. Research in Motion Ltd. In that decision, following an application brought by Blakes on behalf of Certicom, the Court enjoined RIM's hostile bid for Certicom as a result of RIM's breach of its confidentiality agreements with Certicom. Martin Mariettaserves as a reminder that confidentiality agreements should only be entered

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from