"Contracts entered into and in force need to be replaced by fresh contracts after merged or takeovers entities that have been integrated pursuant orders passed by Courts or Tribunals." Do you agree?
CS Professional · Corporate Restructuring, Valuation and Insolvency · PYQS · December 2019
"Contracts entered into and in force need to be replaced by fresh contracts after merged or takeovers entities that have been integrated pursuant orders passed by Courts or Tribunals." Do you agree?
Answer & Explanation:
Legally speaking, orders of Court or Tribunal sanctioning scheme prevails and shall ensure that the contracts entered by the merging entity shall continue to be transferred in the name of merged entity from relevant date. However, other issues in the contracts with a third party may require company to inform about merger or may give rise to other party to terminate the contract. Normally lease agreements, that contain fixed tenure may release the landlord from such restriction in the event of restructure of lessee entity. Further, the merged entity would need to check various rights and obligations spelt out in the contracts with third parties and should allocate teams to identify and ensure compliance of those requirements. In short, all existing contracts with its terms need revisit.
Topics: Mergers and Takeovers
Related Questions in this Topic
- Internal accruals accumulate to reserves prompts management to venture more avenues through acquisitions or mergers but ...
- The unpalatable or inevitable recession can also be a key factor to trigger Mergers/ Takeovers-how far is it proved true...
- "Effective Insolvency Law Systems have a number of aims and objectives." Explain with reference to World Bank principles...
- RPL Bank extended a term loan to Inspire Ltd. Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) has issued order against the company for reco...
- Give a short note on "Effect of recognition of a foreign main proceeding" under the UNCITRAL Model Law.