EU change to takeover procedures resisted
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A cross-party committee of peers has called on Brussels to abandon proposals for a European takeover directive which would replace Britain's non-statutory arrangements with a legally-binding system for controlling behaviour during bids.
The House of Lords Select Committee on the European Communities said that harmonisation gains from adopting the directive would be outweighed by the damage it would do to existing arrangements in the UK where the Takeover Panel supervises contested bids through the application of the City Takeover Code. The Panel has launched a fierce rearguard action to have the directive ditched, warning that it would create a lawyers' paradise with target companies running to the courts to frustrate hostile bids.
In a 160-page report released yesterday the Lords committee says the directive might prevent the Panel from applying the Takeover Code with sufficient certainty and flexibility and increase the risk of "tactical litigation". The committee also concluded that the directive did not meet the requirements set down by the EU for subsidiarity - the principle that, wherever possible, decision-making is devolved to national level - while safeguards in the directive to discourage target companies from appealing to the courts were insufficient.
The UK's efficient system for the regulation of takeovers"should not be put at risk without substantial and clearly identifiable benefits", said the report.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments