Ankit Sharma, Himanshu Pabreja
The prohibition on the grant of financial assistance by a company to any person for the purpose of purchasing or acquiring the company’s own shares is typical of common law jurisdictions. The practice was originally introduced in the United Kingdom after the Greene Committee expressed its disaffection with the practice of ‘asset stripping’ takeovers, whereby the resources of the target company and its subsidiaries are used directly or indirectly to assist the purchaser financially to make the acquisition. Indeed, as the target company remains to be an empty shell, the practice is seen as liable to prejudicing the interests of the creditors of the target company, or of any shareholders who do not accept the offer for their shares to be acquired, or the existing shareholders of the company who are not extended an offer for purchase of their shares by such purchaser. Continue reading
Isabelle Wenger, LL.M. in International Dispute Resolution at King’s College London
‘The dispute settlement system negotiated during the Uruguay Round seems to me still today an extraordinary achievement that comes close to a miracle. It seems to me to be wise not to take its existence for granted and to be guaranteed forever but to contribute to its consolidation and further developing in pursuing with circumspection and caution, but also with courage and in total independence, the road, which has been taken, and which has proved so far to be a notable success.’
Meera Manoj, Intern at Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas – Advocates & Solicitors
Recently, the United States (“US”) issued an unprecedented challenge at the World Trade Organisation (“WTO”) against almost every export subsidy scheme maintained by India for violating the 1994 Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (“ASCM”).
After consultations between the US and India failed on 11th April, 2018, the WTO has initiated the process for setting up a Panel. If successful, the challenge could wipe out $7 billion worth of Indian benefits just annually. However, its true significance lies in the global scope of its consequences. It would have a domino effect to invalidate or shorten the period of export subsidies for twenty-two developing countries, and consequently stymie their economic growth. Continue reading
The KSLR Commercial & Financial Law Blog, part of the King’s Student Law Review, welcomes submissions on all current/topical issues of commercial and financial law.
Topics of interest include, but are not limited to:
- US, tariffs and trade war.
- The UK property market: where is it heading, and rather, where should it be heading?
- NHS after Brexit: What does a commercially viable future look like?
- The impact of Blockchain on financial regulation;
- UNCITRAL Group III works. What future for ISDS?