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
Many Arizona employees are often subject to non-compete agreements, or “covenants,” in which the e...
Read More >
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced on January 28, 2020, the reporting thresholds under Sec...
Read More >
The California worker classification bill, Assembly Bill 5 (AB 5), advanced closer to passage just p...
Read More >
Corporate Governance and Securities Law Developments - Directors Can Be Held Liable for Failure to ...
Read More >
An institution’s trade secrets generally include confidential information with commercial value. Tr...
Read More >
WASHINGTON - The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) today released detailed breakdo...
Read More >