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
Millions of people across the globe use some type of wearable device that constantly captures data i...
Read More >
In the SBA Procedural Notice dated October 2, 2020 (the “Approval Notice”), the Small Business Adm...
Read More >
On April 8, 2020, New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy signed Executive Order No. 122 (“Order 122”) req...
Read More >
In a welcome reversal of its prior guidance, on July 22, 2019, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) co...
Read More >
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court will now address the question, “Are contractual no-hire provisions w...
Read More >
In CHS/Community Health Systems, Inc. et al v. Steward Health Care System LLC, the Delaware Court of...
Read More >