Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448
(Code 1981, §14-2-1132, enacted by Ga. L. 1988, p. 158, § 2; Ga. L. 1989, p. 946, § 55; Ga. L. 1990, p. 257, § 19.)
Source: Del. Code Ann. tit. 8, § 203, as added by Del. Laws 1988, Ch. 204. This succeeds the identical provisions of the former Code, O.C.G.A. § 14-2-237 (Supp. 1988).
This provision is designed to encourage any person, before acquiring 10% of the outstanding voting stock of a resident domestic corporation, to seek approval of its board of directors for the terms of any contemplated business combination. By prohibiting a business combination with an interested shareholder for five years (subject to the exceptions described below) the statute attempts to preserve the board's independence and ability to negotiate freely on behalf of the resident domestic corporation.
Subsection (a) prohibits any person who acquires 10% or more of the voting stock (an "interested shareholder") of a resident domestic corporation that has elected coverage under this article from thereafter engaging in any business combination with the corporation for a period of five years from the date that person became an interested shareholder, unless that person obtains approval of the transaction in one of three ways:
(i) Prior to becoming an interested shareholder, the person obtains the consent of the board of directors;
(ii) Becomes the owner of at least 90% of the outstanding shares in the same transaction in which the 10% interest was acquired, excluding certain "insider" shares defined in the subsection; or
(iii) Subsequent to the 10% acquisition, acquires additional shares resulting in ownership of at least 90% of all the outstanding shares (including defined "insider" shares) and obtains the approval of the holders of a majority of the remaining shares, excluding the "insider" shares.
Subsection (b) provides an exception for holders of 10% of the stock who "inadvertently" become such, and who immediately divest themselves of sufficient shares to drop below the 10% ownership level. Those who do may then seek approval of a business combination under subparagraphs (i) and (ii) above. Inadvertent ownership could occur because the issuer has engaged in share repurchases that result in an increase in the percentage ownership represented by a fixed number of shares, or because a shareholder purchased shares in reliance on the issuer's public filings disclosing the number of outstanding shares, which did not reflect recent repurchases.
Note to 1989 Amendment The 1989 amendment to subsection (a)(3) added the phrase "excluding for purposes of determining the number of shares outstanding those shares owned by (A) persons who are directors or officers, their affiliates or associates; (B) subsidiaries of the resident domestic corporation; and (C) employee stock plans in which employee participants do not have the right to determine confidently whether shares held subject to the plan will be tendered in a tender or exchange offer" after the first comma. The effect was to reduce the proportion of shares that must be acquired before approval of the remaining shareholders could be sought.
Note to 1990 Amendment Prior to the 1990 amendment, paragraph (a)(1) provided for an exception to the application of the Business Combinations Act when, prior to the "date" that a shareholder became an interested shareholder, the resident domestic corporation's board of directors approved either the business combination or the transaction that resulted in the shareholder becoming an interested shareholder. The Georgia Business Combinations Act was modeled on Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law. A recent Delaware Chancery Court decision, Siegman v. Columbia Pictures Entertainment, Inc., [Current] Fed. Sec. L. Rep. (CCH) Para. 97, 796 (Del. Ch. Oct. 31, 1989), held that "date" means "time" for purposes of the same exception under the Delaware statute. Thus, if a target resident domestic corporation's board approved an acquisition before the exact time at which an agreement is reached on a subsequent business combination, the three-year waiting period of the Act does not apply. The amendment's substitution of the word "time" for "date" is intended to eliminate any ambiguity and to assure that the result of the Delaware case is explicitly required by the Georgia statute.
The 1990 amendment also changed paragraphs (a)(2) and (a)(3) as such provisions relate to shares held under employee stock plans. The statute provides that shares held under such plans which do not meet certain confidential tender or exchange election features are excluded from the ninety percent threshold that an interested shareholder must acquire to exempt a transaction from the Business Combinations Act. The amendment clarifies that the determination as to whether such a plan provides participants with the requisite rights is to be made exclusively by reference to the plan's governing instruments.
Cross-References Additional approval of business combination, see § 14-2-1111. Bylaws increasing quorum or voting requirements for shareholders, see § 14-2-1021. Greater quorum or voting requirements for voting by shareholders, see § 14-2-727. Mergers, action on plan, see § 14-2-1103. Recapitalization, voting rights of groups, see § 14-2-1004. Reclassification, voting rights of groups, see § 14-2-1004. Sales of assets, action on plan, see § 14-2-1202. Share exchanges, action on plan, see § 14-2-1103.
No results found for Georgia Code 14-2-1132.