When a deal goes wrong – Post‑M&A Disputes

Post‑M&A Disputes

Strict­ly spea­king not a sepa­ra­te sec­tor, post‑M&A dis­pu­tes have many defi­ning simi­la­ri­ties that jus­ti­fy a sepa­ra­te con­side­ra­ti­on as “tran­sac­tion-rela­ted dis­pu­tes”. A/L/M Part­ners have assis­ted their cli­ents’ high­ly expe­ri­en­ced M&A depart­ments in com­plex tran­sac­tion­al dis­pu­tes. A pre­cise know­ledge of the tran­sac­tion pro­cess as well as the tar­ge­ted use of for­ma­ti­ve rights and a con­clu­si­ve argu­men­ta­ti­on on dama­ges are often decisi­ve in such con­tro­ver­sies. A/L/M Part­ners are also fami­li­ar with tran­sac­tion-rela­ted inte­rim- and expert deter­mi­na­ti­on pro­cee­dings as well as with W&I insu­rance policies. 

Relevant matters include:

Repre­sen­ting the Ger­man sel­ler of a phar­maceu­ti­cal com­pa­ny in a DIS arbi­tra­ti­on against the buy­er becau­se of alle­gedly fal­se repre­sen­ta­ti­ons and war­ran­ty claims under the share purcha­se agreement

Defen­ding a US auto­mo­ti­ve sup­pli­er in a post‑M&A arbi­tra­ti­on under DIS rules against dama­ge claims for the alle­ged fail­ure to clo­se the deal

Advi­sing an Indi­an buy­er in a post‑M&A dis­pu­te regar­ding the adjus­t­ment of the share purcha­se agree­ment fol­lo­wing a loss event at the tar­get com­pa­ny bet­ween sig­ning and closing

Repre­sen­ting the sel­lers of a Ger­man indus­tri­al com­pa­ny in a post‑M&A arbi­tra­ti­on under ICC rules in con­nec­tion with balan­ce sheet-rela­ted purcha­se pri­ce adjus­t­ment claims

Repre­sen­ting a lea­ding glo­bal manu­fac­tu­rer of che­mi­cal pro­ducts in a high-volu­me post‑M&A ICC emer­gen­cy arbi­tra­ti­on and in main arbi­tra­ti­on pro­cee­dings in con­nec­tion with the acqui­si­ti­on of a part of the company

Repre­sen­ting a tech­no­lo­gy group in a lar­ge post‑M&A / joint ven­ture-rela­ted dis­pu­te in the tele­com­mu­ni­ca­ti­ons sec­tor (two DIS arbi­tra­ti­on pro­cee­dings sea­ted in Ger­ma­ny regar­ding dama­ges, con­tri­bu­ti­ons to the joint ven­ture, the ter­mi­na­ti­on of a call opti­on and other obli­ga­ti­ons under the share purcha­se agree­ment, advice on settlement)

Repre­sen­ting a finan­cial inves­tor after the sale of a trade jour­nal publi­shing house in a post‑M&A court case con­cer­ning equi­ty gua­ran­tees and in par­al­lel expert deter­mi­na­ti­on pro­cee­dings to deter­mi­ne the alle­ged pri­ce reduc­tion right, advice on sett­le­ment solution

Repre­sen­ting the purcha­ser of a manu­fac­tu­ring faci­li­ty in an ICC arbi­tra­ti­on against the for­mer owner and joint ven­ture part­ner regar­ding the allo­ca­ti­on of fixed cos­ts of the plant and the sub­se­quent dis­so­lu­ti­on of the joint ven­ture with acqui­si­ti­on of trademarks/brands by our client

Repre­sen­ting a foun­der after the sale of an e‑commerce com­pa­ny against a PE inves­tor against claims based on war­ran­ties and c.i.c. due to an alle­gedly over­ly opti­mi­stic plan

Advi­sing a tech­no­lo­gy com­pa­ny in a high-volu­me dis­pu­te with a joint ven­ture part­ner regar­ding exit rights, inclu­ding a put opti­on and a com­pa­ny auc­tion; sett­le­ment advice