Continuous disclosure obligations - Indian securities market

 

A regulatory environment that supports robust secondary market disclosures is critical for a well-functioning securities market. Ongoing disclosures by listed companies are being increasingly scrutinised by regulators, stock exchanges and market participants to see if timely and accurate disclosures of all material information are being made by the listed entity. Accordingly, it is important for companies to ensure that developments in their businesses translate to appropriate regulatory disclosures.

A recent example of the importance of secondary market disclosure is the Facebook case. In 2019, the US Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) announced charges against Facebook Inc. (“Facebook”) for making misleading disclosures in its periodic filings against the risks pertaining to misuse of its user data by third parties. The SEC alleged that in public disclosures, Facebook presented the risk of misuse of user data as “merely hypothetical”, when they were aware that a third-party developer had actually misused Facebook user data. The SEC press release states that Facebook has agreed to pay $100 million to settle the charges.

We discuss this development and learnings for the Indian market below. Continue Reading Continuous Disclosure Obligations: Learnings for the Indian Securities Market

SEBI Working Group on Related Party Transactions

 In the battle for good governance, India Inc. keeps tripping on three letters – RPT. Related-Party Transactions. This, despite the fact that India has one of the most elaborate set of rules and regulations for disclosures and approval of RPT by both listed and unlisted companies.

Historically, the Companies Act, 1956 did not specifically regulate RPTs. It had provisions that only restricted certain types of transactions.

The Companies Act, 2013 (CA, 2013) enacted Section 188, which for the first time began regulating certain types of transactions between companies and its “related parties” (as defined in CA 2013), and provided for the approval of such transactions (exceeding a prescribed monetary threshold) by non-related parties. Continue Reading SEBI Working Group on Related Party Transactions: Will the net be cast too wide?

Listen to this post

LEGAL PROTECTION OF SOFTWARE IN INDIA

Introduction

As businesses strive to shift from paper to digital, there is an increasing penetration of software products across industries. This is particularly true in India. The NASSCOM Report evinces that the software products market was the fastest-growing segment amongst all IT services in India in FY2019.[1] While the making of software requires a considerable amount of human, technical, and financial resources; it can be copied within seconds, at infinitesimal cost. Thus, there is a need to protect software with the strongest available intellectual property protections. In India, the intellectual property regime provides a number of tools to protect such innovations. These include, patents and copyright. Each of these tools have their own set of peculiarities and will be discussed vis-à-vis protection of software, within the framework of cross-jurisdictional analysis. Continue Reading Grooming the Law with Technology: Legal Protection of Software in India

Charging Infrastructure for Electric Vehicles in India - Policy and Challenges

One of the biggest stumbling blocks for the success of deploying electric vehicle (“EV”) scheme in India is the lack of adequate charging infrastructure (“Charging Infrastructure”). The revised guidelines for Charging Infrastructure for EV, issued on October 01, 2019 (“CI Guidelines”),[1] aim to simplify the process for setting up Charging Infrastructure. Below is a brief analysis of the CI Guidelines: Continue Reading Charging Infrastructure for Electric Vehicles in India: Policy and Challenges

SEBI-Streamlines-Rights-Issue-Process

 

The SEBI has streamlined certain aspects of the rights issue process that is expected to not only reduce the timelines but also provide clarity on the renunciation and trading of rights entitlements. These are welcome changes and will potentially make rights issues a preferred option to raise capital for listed companies.

Whilst rights issues are offerings to existing shareholders, it typically takes 55 to 58 days to complete the process (excluding SEBI review and the time taken for due diligence and drafting the offer document). The process involves (i) a minimum 15-day rights issue application period, (ii) mandatory participation by certain investors only through the non-ASBA process (such as through cheque) and (iii) a seven clear working days intimation prior to the record date. SEBI has addressed some of these concerns through amendments to the SEBI ICDR Regulations, SEBI Listing Regulations (both effective from December 26, 2019) and a circular with effect from February 14, 2020. Continue Reading SEBI Streamlines Rights Issue Process

Listen to this post

Arbitration Agreements in Unstamped Documents

 

Introduction

There has been constant confusion with respect to admissibility of unstamped documents. Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (“Stamp Act”), provides that an unstamped or inadequately stamped document is inadmissible in evidence. Applying Section 35 of the Stamp Act, the Supreme Court in Garware Wall Ropes Ltd v. Coastal Marine Construction & Engineering Ltd [1](“Garware Judgement”) held that an arbitration agreement contained in an unstamped contract cannot be taken in evidence and invoked. It was further held that, in case the Court is faced with an unstamped document, it must proceed to impound the same, in accordance with the provisions of the Stamp Act; only once such an impounding is done — the deficit stamp duty and penalty paid, can the Court proceed on the basis of the arbitration agreement. Continue Reading Invoking Arbitration Agreements in Unstamped Documents – A Case Comment on Garware Wall Ropes v. Coastal Marine Constructions & Engineering

Global trends in private M&A

This guest post is by Jaya Gupta, Head of India Desk, Corporate at Allen & Overy LLP
——————————————————————

 

In 2019, global M&A activity switched down a gear although it was still the third-strongest year in a decade in terms of value and transaction volume.

With macroeconomic issues such as continuing trade wars between the US and China, tensions in the Middle East and, to some extent, Brexit, impacting cross-border activities, many investors resorted to strategic domestic megadeals.

Continue Reading Global Trends in Private M&A

CHAIRMAN OR MANAGING DIRECTOR SEBI Regulation

Section 203(1) of the Companies Act states that an individual shall not be appointed or reappointed as the chairperson, of the company as well as the managing director (MD) or the chief executive officer (CEO) at the same time, unless the articles of the company provides otherwise or the company does not carry on multiple businesses. Further, this restriction is not applicable to certain specified class of companies engaged in multiple businesses and which have appointed one or more CEOs for each such business. Continue Reading Chairman or Managing Director? – Eenie Meenie Miney Mo

Indian Labour Laws Recap 2019 and Outlook 2020

The year 2019 can be said to be a watershed year in relation to the employment law regime in India. The Indian government took various steps to simplify and streamline the dated employment legislations, veritably in a bid to rise up in the index of Ease of Doing Business in India. The courts in India too played their part in interpretation of the existing legal regime. Here, we not only look at some of the key, impactful developments, but also look forward to what 2020 may have in store for India Inc., in relation to the same: Continue Reading Recap of Key Labour Law Developments of 2019 & Looking Forward to 2020

Cross-border demergers – lack of legislative intent?

In the matter of Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Limited, the Ahmedabad bench of the NCLT has ruled that Section 234 of the Companies Act, 2013 and the FEMA Cross Border Merger Regulations, 2018, do not permit cross-border demergers. Sun Pharma sought to demerge two of its investment undertakings in India into two overseas resulting companies, based in the Netherlands and the US. Being a listed entity, it obtained prior approval of SEBI through the relevant stock exchanges and the requisite corporate consents of its shareholders and creditors. The RBI granted its implied deemed approval by stating that the demerged company is required to abide by the applicable rules and regulations, which it had undertaken that it would. None of the other stakeholders to whom notices were issued by the tribunal, including the Registrar of Companies (ROC), objected to the demerger on the ground that it was not permitted by law. Continue Reading Cross-border Demergers – Lack of Legislative Intent?