Use of Cash-Settled Derivatives in Public Takeovers: A Challenge for Legislators, Regulators and Courts

Danijela Stanković
{"title":"Use of Cash-Settled Derivatives in Public Takeovers: A Challenge for Legislators, Regulators and Courts","authors":"Danijela Stanković","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2290899","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In last couple of years, the activities of certain investors on world capital markets raised controversies as to their duties to disclose shareholdings in publicly listed issuers. These activities involved the use of cash-settled security-based financial instruments, such as call options and swaps, which enabled their holders to conceal their takeover intentions and virtually acquire access to shares in target companies, while staying out of scope of the legislation in force. This was apparently possible since cash-settled financial instruments did not provide their holders with any right either to acquire the referenced shares or to direct the voting under those shares in the general meeting of the target. The non-disclosure of positions in cash-settled financial instruments referencing the target shares left other investors, shareholders and boards of directors without the relevant information on possible changes of control, which might have influenced the target’s stock prices and possible defence strategies in case of a hostile takeover. The question whether these investors violated their duties or not is still unsettled among scholars which is why some states like Germany decided to expressly include these financial instruments in the securities legislation disclosure duties.","PeriodicalId":117639,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Takeover Law (Topic)","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Takeover Law (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2290899","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

In last couple of years, the activities of certain investors on world capital markets raised controversies as to their duties to disclose shareholdings in publicly listed issuers. These activities involved the use of cash-settled security-based financial instruments, such as call options and swaps, which enabled their holders to conceal their takeover intentions and virtually acquire access to shares in target companies, while staying out of scope of the legislation in force. This was apparently possible since cash-settled financial instruments did not provide their holders with any right either to acquire the referenced shares or to direct the voting under those shares in the general meeting of the target. The non-disclosure of positions in cash-settled financial instruments referencing the target shares left other investors, shareholders and boards of directors without the relevant information on possible changes of control, which might have influenced the target’s stock prices and possible defence strategies in case of a hostile takeover. The question whether these investors violated their duties or not is still unsettled among scholars which is why some states like Germany decided to expressly include these financial instruments in the securities legislation disclosure duties.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在公共收购中使用现金结算衍生品:对立法者、监管者和法院的挑战
过去几年,某些投资者在世界资本市场上的活动引发了争议,即他们是否有义务披露在公开上市公司的持股情况。这些活动涉及使用以现金结算的证券为基础的金融工具,如看涨期权和掉期,这些工具使其持有人能够隐瞒其收购意图,实际上可以获得目标公司的股票,同时又不受现行立法的约束。这显然是可能的,因为现金结算的金融工具不赋予其持有人任何权利,既可以获得参考股票,也可以在目标公司的股东大会上指导这些股票的表决。由于未披露涉及目标股票的现金结算金融工具的持仓情况,其他投资者、股东和董事会无法获得有关可能发生控制权变动的相关信息,这可能会影响目标公司的股价和在发生敌意收购时可能采取的防御战略。这些投资者是否违反了他们的义务这一问题在学者之间仍然没有定论,这就是为什么德国等一些国家决定将这些金融工具明确纳入证券法披露义务的原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Competition Laws and Earnings Management: International Evidence Deal Structure Takeover Bids’ Profile Under Mandatory Bid Rule: Evidence from an Emerging Market Speed in Decision-Making: An Assessment of the Australian Takeovers Panel Takeover Litigation in 2014
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1