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
With very few exceptions, the rules governing governmental 457(b) plans require a “severance of emp...
Read More >
In this episode I visit with one of my favorite people, Francine McKenna, a reporter at MarketWatch....
Read More >
On December 19, 2020, China's National Development and Reform Commission ("NDRC") and the Ministry o...
Read More >
On August 8, 2019, the U.S. Department of Labor announced that it issued three new opinion letters. ...
Read More >
As “whistleblower” issues pervade national headlines, lawmakers in some jurisdictions, including N...
Read More >
This is an update to a previous post from June 24, 2019. Yesterday, Dallas became the last of the t...
Read More >