Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 22 DECEMBER 2021

Will A Billion Dollar Termination Shift The M&A Landscape?

McMillan LLP
McMillan LLP
Contributor
McMillan LLP

McMillan LLP

The firm : McMillan LLP is one of Canada’s leading national law firms with offices in Montreal,...

View firm profile
Explore more from McMillan LLP

The economic disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic has prompted a wave of litigation across the globe in respect of abandoned M&A transactions.

CanadaCorporate/Commercial Law

The economic disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic has prompted a wave of litigation across the globe in respect of abandoned M&A transactions. These "busted deal" disputes typically involve purchasers invoking material adverse effect (MAE) clauses, interim operating covenants or related provisions in M&A agreements to avoid closing a transaction. Until recently, these provisions received scant treatment in Canadian case law. Last year,  we discussed the Ontario Superior Court of Justice's decision in Fairstone Financial Holdings Inc. v Duo Bank of Canada regarding MAE clauses. This week, in Cineplex Inc. v. Cineworld Group Plc and 1232743 B.C. Ltd., the same Court delivered a staggering $1.24 billion judgement to a target company for the purchaser's improper termination of their M&A transaction. The decision of Justice Conway provides new guidance on the interpretation of interim operating covenants under Canadian common law. It also addresses the relationship

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.

The foregoing provides only an overview and does not constitute legal advice. Readers are cautioned against making any decisions based on this material alone. Rather, specific legal advice should be obtained.

© McMillan LLP 2025

See more popular content from