Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 29 APRIL 2015

Justice Hold Fee-Shifting Bylaw Not Per Se Invalid

In finding that the bylaw was facially valid, the court noted that "neither the [Delaware General Corporation Law] nor any other Delaware statute forbids the enactment of fee-shifting bylaws."

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

The Delaware Supreme Court has now opened the door for corporations, in the context of intra-corporate disputes, to avoid the so-called "American rule," under which each party bears its own costs regardless of which party prevails. Specifically, the court held that a corporation may adopt a bylaw provision that provides for fee-shifting similar to the so-called "English rule," under which a nonprevailing party must pay the fees and expenses of its adversary. While such bylaws are relatively rare, this recent decision will undoubtedly encourage corporations to adopt them. Time will tell whether the Supreme Court's decision will chill future shareholder litigation.

In ATP Tour v. Deutscher Tennis Bund, No. 534, 2013 (Del. May 8, 2014), the Delaware Supreme Court addressed questions of law certified by the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware relating to a fee-shifting provision in the bylaws of a Delaware non-stock corporation. The bylaws permitted the

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