From Bruce Hoffman, Acting Director, Bureau of Competition, FTC
December 20, 2017
December 20, 2017
When preparing an HSR filing for a proposed acquisition, some
practitioners counsel their clients not to submit binding agreements or side
letters negotiated between the merging parties that reflect the parties’
antitrust review obligations, risk-sharing commitments, and potential remedial
measures. Some claim that these “side agreements” are ancillary to the main
agreement, while others withhold such side agreements believing they are protected
by a common interest privilege or as part of a joint defense agreement. Both
positions are legally incorrect, and contrary to the requirements of HSR Rules.
“Furnish copies of all documents that constitute the agreement(s) among the
acquiring person(s) and the person(s) whose assets, voting securities or
non-corporate interests are to be acquired,” [emphasis added].
(...) the parties may not exclude documents if they “contain … other agreements
between the parties or other important items of the transaction” -- meaning any
agreement entered by the parties or their representatives that bears on the
terms of the transaction and is binding on the parties must be submitted as part of the HSR
filing. This includes any agreement that alters the terms of the merger during
the antitrust review process, regardless of where those commitments are written
down. If there is an enforceable agreement that binds the parties to take
actions related to antitrust clearance, it must be submitted as part of the HSR
form.
Side agreements between merging parties are not covered by any privilege
or protection (such as the attorney work product doctrine) and may not be
withheld, even if the parties have signed a joint defense agreement. Whenever
side agreements are part of the transaction negotiations, they are part of the
agreement between the parties and responsive to Item 3(b). Of course, analyses,
recommendations, and strategy explanations that are not binding or enforceable
by the merging parties need not be turned over pursuant to Item 3(b).
Nonetheless, these materials may still be responsive to Items 4(c) or (d) and,
if privileged, as with other privileged 4(c) or 4(d) materials, should still be
listed in the privilege log. Specifically, the privilege log must comply with
the detailed requirements in the HSR Instructions, which indicate that parties
must state the factual basis supporting the privilege claim in sufficient
detail to enable staff to assess the validity of the claim.
In order for parties to comply with the requirements of the HSR Act and
Rules, they must complete their HSR forms accurately and submit all required
documents. Remember that certifying to the veracity of the HSR Form must be
done in the presence of a notary or contain language found in 28 U.S.C. § 1746
relating to unsworn declarations under penalty of perjury. Failing to comply
with the HSR Act can lead to significant penalties, such as restarting the HSR
waiting period and civil penalties of over $40,000 per day a party is in
violation of the Act.
No comments:
Post a Comment