You Wanted It, You Got
It
In a decision from Delaware
decided last year, the court held that, where the controlling shareholder caused
a corporation to adopt a forum selection by-law, that majority shareholder
consented to venue in that jurisdiction. In
re: Pilgrim’s Pride Corp. Derivative Litigation, C.A. No. 2018-0058-GTL,
2019 WL 1224556 (Del. Ch. March 15, 2019).
The controlling shareholder of
Pilgrim’s Pride orchestrated the sale of the company. Coincident with the
approval of that sale, Pilgrim’s Pride’s Board of Directors amended its by-laws
to provide, inter alia, that disputes
with respect to the internal governance of the company must be heard in
Delaware. When, after the transaction was approved, certain of the shareholders
brought a derivative action in Delaware against that controlling shareholder, the
controlling shareholder sought to have the suit dismissed on the basis of lack
of jurisdiction. This assertion the Chancery Court rejected, observing:
On the same
day that the Acquisition was approved, the Board voted unanimously to adopt a
forum-selection bylaw, with the Director Defendants whom Parent controlled
constituting a five-member majority of the nine-member Board. The bylaw made
the Delaware courts exclusive forum for breach of fiduciary litigation
involving the Company. This decision holds that on the facts alleged, Parent
implicitly consented to personal jurisdiction in this court for the purposes of
claims falling within the forum-selection bylaw.
No comments:
Post a Comment