02Nov
COVID-19: High court issues preliminary ruling on interpretation of Material Adverse Effect clause
In a dispute between WEX (Inc.) (“WEX”) and the shareholders (the “Sellers”) of eNett International (Jersey) Limited (“eNett”) and Optal Limited (“Optal”), following an expedited trial on a number of preliminary issues, the High Court’s judgment (Travelport Limited & Others v WEX INC [2020] EWHC 2670 (Comm)) provides helpful guidance on the interpretation of material adverse effect (“MAE”) clauses which are not commonly used in English law acquisition documents. The judgment is also notable for...
By:
Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner
Related
In the September 2019 Visa Bulletin issued by the US Department of State, all employment-based class...
Read More >
The New Jersey DOL is very aggressive on the issue of independent contractor status, i.e. the issue ...
Read More >
When Canada’s Cannabis Act and supporting regulations came into force on October 17, 2018, Canada b...
Read More >
On November 15, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Labor, and the Depart...
Read More >
As of July 28, 2019, Washington employers with 15 or more employees are required to provide reasonab...
Read More >
In a 3-1 decision, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or the Board) reversed long-held Board p...
Read More >