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
As everyone knows, I’m not a big fan of payroll providers being third-party administrators, at leas...
Read More >
On December 19, 2019, the Senate passed, as part of the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act 2020...
Read More >
DAK Americas Mississippi, Inc. v. Jedson Engineering, Inc. et al, No. 1:18cv31-HSO-JCG, 2019 BL 2088...
Read More >
This episode offers the top 10 new employment laws coming out of New York in the first half of 2019....
Read More >
Earlier this week, on Monday, we had reported that New Jersey was allowing, subject to proper distan...
Read More >
ERISA requires Summary Plan Descriptions and other disclosures to be "written in a manner calculated...
Read More >