با برنامه Player FM !
David Morgan Investments Pty Ltd v Maggie Beer Holdings Ltd [2024] NSWSC 778
Manage episode 429497557 series 2953536
“You changed the business I sold you so you could underpay me!”
___
By deed P sold their shares in an online retail business to D.P was to receive $20M, some shares in D, and the Earn Out Amount (“EOM”): [3]
According to the deed, the EOM was the Base EOM of $10M plus the Additional EOM: [6]
The Additional EOM was the rounded difference between the Base EOM (I.e. $10M) and “Earnings”: [7]
“Earnings” meant EBITDA over the relevant year. The deed contained a mechanism for D send a proposed Earnings calculation (as part of a P and L), for P to make a reply including setting out “Contested Matters”, for the parties to negotiate the contested matters in good faith, and for the matter to be referred to an expert if negotiations failed: [10] - [14]
D sent a P and L suggesting Earnings were ~$6M (making the Additional EOM zero): [16]
P sent a reply calculating Earnings at ~$15M (taking the Additional EOM to its maximum possible figure) and raising Contested Matters: [17]
Following unsuccessful good faith negotiations, the matter was referred to an expert: [18]
How was the expert to calculate Earnings?: [19]
Cll 2.1 and 2.2 of the deed required Earnings to be calc’d disregarding revenues or expenses not part of the Co’s ordinary business including: costs relating to the share sale, restructure costs, certain related party transactions, and the costs of kicking off any new business: [21]
Cl 2.3 of the deed noted the parties’ agreement that Earnings were to be calc’d as if the Co’s business were run the same way post-purchase as it had been pre-purchase; and that D would not make big changes to the Co’s business (or, if D did make big changes, the EOM would be normalised to exclude those changes’ impact): [21]
P sued, seeking declarations that the expert determine Earnings in accordance with all of the above. D resisted: [25] - [27]
The Court found for the P: [28]
The well-known principles regarding contractual interpretation were (respectfully) helpfully restated at [29] - [33]
The Court noted the parties’ explicit agreement on the mandatory language in Cl 2.3; that Earnings *must* be calculated that way: [48] - [50]
The proper construction was found to be on that basis: [54]
P’s pressed for their Contested Matters to be referred to the expert.P said Earnings had to be adjusted due to D failing to implement a new website, leading to lower website traffic. The Court accepted this Contested Matter was appropriately dealt with by the expert: [63] - [77]
Similarly: P’s complaint regarding D’s failure to implement P’s logistics proposal was to be properly dealt with by the expert: [78] - [82]
Again similarly: P’s complaint that D’s marketing efforts wrongly focussed on conversion rather than branding was properly dealt with by the expert: [83] - [86]
The expert was required to value Earnings as P proposed, and to deal with P’s Contested Matters: [87]
___
Please head to www.gravamen.com.au - that's my law firm!
221 قسمت
Manage episode 429497557 series 2953536
“You changed the business I sold you so you could underpay me!”
___
By deed P sold their shares in an online retail business to D.P was to receive $20M, some shares in D, and the Earn Out Amount (“EOM”): [3]
According to the deed, the EOM was the Base EOM of $10M plus the Additional EOM: [6]
The Additional EOM was the rounded difference between the Base EOM (I.e. $10M) and “Earnings”: [7]
“Earnings” meant EBITDA over the relevant year. The deed contained a mechanism for D send a proposed Earnings calculation (as part of a P and L), for P to make a reply including setting out “Contested Matters”, for the parties to negotiate the contested matters in good faith, and for the matter to be referred to an expert if negotiations failed: [10] - [14]
D sent a P and L suggesting Earnings were ~$6M (making the Additional EOM zero): [16]
P sent a reply calculating Earnings at ~$15M (taking the Additional EOM to its maximum possible figure) and raising Contested Matters: [17]
Following unsuccessful good faith negotiations, the matter was referred to an expert: [18]
How was the expert to calculate Earnings?: [19]
Cll 2.1 and 2.2 of the deed required Earnings to be calc’d disregarding revenues or expenses not part of the Co’s ordinary business including: costs relating to the share sale, restructure costs, certain related party transactions, and the costs of kicking off any new business: [21]
Cl 2.3 of the deed noted the parties’ agreement that Earnings were to be calc’d as if the Co’s business were run the same way post-purchase as it had been pre-purchase; and that D would not make big changes to the Co’s business (or, if D did make big changes, the EOM would be normalised to exclude those changes’ impact): [21]
P sued, seeking declarations that the expert determine Earnings in accordance with all of the above. D resisted: [25] - [27]
The Court found for the P: [28]
The well-known principles regarding contractual interpretation were (respectfully) helpfully restated at [29] - [33]
The Court noted the parties’ explicit agreement on the mandatory language in Cl 2.3; that Earnings *must* be calculated that way: [48] - [50]
The proper construction was found to be on that basis: [54]
P’s pressed for their Contested Matters to be referred to the expert.P said Earnings had to be adjusted due to D failing to implement a new website, leading to lower website traffic. The Court accepted this Contested Matter was appropriately dealt with by the expert: [63] - [77]
Similarly: P’s complaint regarding D’s failure to implement P’s logistics proposal was to be properly dealt with by the expert: [78] - [82]
Again similarly: P’s complaint that D’s marketing efforts wrongly focussed on conversion rather than branding was properly dealt with by the expert: [83] - [86]
The expert was required to value Earnings as P proposed, and to deal with P’s Contested Matters: [87]
___
Please head to www.gravamen.com.au - that's my law firm!
221 قسمت
Όλα τα επεισόδια
×به Player FM خوش آمدید!
Player FM در سراسر وب را برای یافتن پادکست های با کیفیت اسکن می کند تا همین الان لذت ببرید. این بهترین برنامه ی پادکست است که در اندروید، آیفون و وب کار می کند. ثبت نام کنید تا اشتراک های شما در بین دستگاه های مختلف همگام سازی شود.