Corporate Law Developments (March 16, 2017) New York State Proposes Paid Family Leave Regulations, Trump Signs Second Executive Order Banning Immigration, and SEC to Require Hyperlinks and HTML Format for Public Filings

 

by Nathan Jew and Jeanne Solomon

This week’s corporate law news roundup includes discussions of the recently-published proposed regulations under the New York Paid Family Leave Law, Trump’s second executive order banning immigration, and the SEC’s adoption of rules requiring hyperlinks and HTML format for public filings.

Continue reading

Corporate Law Developments (March 7, 2017) First Benefit Corporation Completes Initial Public Offering, California Court Holds that Sarbanes Preempts Attorney-Client Privilege, and Trump Effects Elimination of SEC Resource Extraction Rule

This week’s corporate law news roundup includes discussions of Laureate Education being the first benefit corporation to successfully complete an initial public offering (IPO), a California federal district court’s holding that the protection of whistleblowers under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) preempts the attorney-client privilege, and the elimination by the Trump administration of the SEC’s resource extraction rule.

Continue reading

Corporate Law Developments (February 28, 2017) UK Health and Safety Compliance Programs Favor Having at Least One UK Board Director; SASB Releases Rules of Procedure and Conceptual Framework; and Delaware Confirms BJR Can Apply to Tender-Offer Mergers

by Sheri Yano

Puzzle piecesThis week’s corporate law news roundup includes discussions of Why UK Health and Safety Laws Favor Having at Least One UK Board Director; The SASB’s Recent Release of Rules of Procedure and Conceptual Framework; and The Delaware Supreme Court’s confirmation that the business judgment rule applies to tender-offer mergers approved by a fully informed, uncoerced vote of disinterested stockholders Continue reading

Civil partnerships: time for the Government to decide which way to jump

The UK government has resisted making a decision on the future of civil partnerships but the Court of Appeal has now told the government that time is running out.  Rebecca Steinfeld and Charles Keidan have campaigned since 2014 for a change in the law.  On 21 February 2017 the Court of Appeal refused to allow their application for a judicial review of the government’s decision not extend the civil partnership regime to opposite-sex couples.  To do so, the Court said, would be to micro-manage government policy and it was legitimate for the government to take time to make a proper assessment.  However, the Court of Appeal made it clear that it was their unanimous view that the bar constituted a potential violation of their human rights under Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) and Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention. Continue reading

Are family lawyers moving with the times?

With the approaching era of driverless cars and shopping delivery by drone, some have predicted that the role of lawyers will be greatly changed by technological advancements in artificial intelligence. Are technological advancements to be welcomed when it comes to family law? Continue reading

Corporate Law Developments (February 21, 2017) Co-ownership of an airplane could affect a director’s independence; Trump’s Executive Order Could Overhaul Dodd-Frank; and Hensarling proposes changes to the Financial CHOICE Act

by  Sheri Yano

This week’s corporate law news roundup includes discussions of the Delaware Supreme Court’s finding in Sandys v. Pincus that co-ownership of an airplane could be a factor in determining a director’s independence; President Trump’s Core Principles for Regulating the United States Financial System executive order and its potential to overhaul Dodd-Frank; and the Chair of the House Financial Services Committee’s proposed changes to the Financial CHOICE Act. Continue reading

Corporate Law Developments (February 17, 2017): Allergen pays for tender offer violations; Delaware continues to apply the business judgment rule to merger transactions; and Delaware fee-shifting bylaw declared invalid

by Jeanne R. Solomon and Sheri Yano

This week’s corporate law news roundup includes discussions of Allergen’s $15 million SEC penalty for tender offer violations; the Delaware Court of Chancery’s decision in In re Solera Holdings, Inc. Stockholder Litigation that the business judgment rule applies to merger transactions approved by a fully informed, uncoerced vote of disinterested stockholders; and Delaware Court of Chancery’s decision in Solak v. Sarowitz, that fee-shifting bylaws are facially invalid.

Continue reading

Corporate Law Developments (February 6, 2017): PRESIDENT TRUMP’S EXECUTIVE ORDER ON U.S. IMMIGRATION POLICY; DELAWARE COURT REJECTS SUPERMAJORITY DIRECTOR REMOVAL BYLAW; FTC REVISES HART-SCOTT-RODINO ANTITRUST IMPROVEMENTS ACT THRESHOLDS FOR 2017

by Jeanne R. Solomon and Stacy Stecher

This week’s corporate law news roundup includes discussions of President Trump’s Executive Order (Order) on U.S. immigration policy; the decision of the Delaware Chancery Court that invalidated a corporate bylaw that purported to require a supermajority vote to remove directors; and the release by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) of its annual revision to the minimum “size of transaction” and “size of person” thresholds requiring pre-merger notification to the FTC, effective for all transactions closing on or after February 27, 2017.

Continue reading