Inmarsat Plc, Re Companies Act

Inmarsat Plc, Re Companies Act

The objections were not frivolous but contributed little to the scrutiny of a fundamentally sound scheme and were primarily aimed at extracting a better commercial deal. The court exercised its discretion to make no order as to costs, balancing the need not to discourage genuine objections with the need not to...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Applicant: Inmarsat plc; Respondent: Connect Bidco Ltd; Objector: Oaktree Value Opportunities LP and Oaktree Capital Management LP; Objector: Kite Lake Capital Management LLP and Rubric Capital Management LP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 April 2020
Procedural Posture
Scheme of Arrangement (companies Act 2006) / Costs Ruling Following Sanction of Scheme
Outcome
No order as to costs
Legal Topics
Schemes of Arrangement, Costs Orders, Shareholder Rights
Company Law Civil Procedure Schemes of Arrangement Costs Orders Shareholder Rights

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Inmarsat plc

Applicant

Connect Bidco Ltd

Respondent

Oaktree Value Opportunities LP and Oaktree Capital Management LP

Objector

Kite Lake Capital Management LLP and Rubric Capital Management LP

Objector

Procedural Posture

Scheme of Arrangement (companies Act 2006) / Costs Ruling Following Sanction of Scheme

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether objectors to a scheme of arrangement should be awarded or pay costs after withdrawing opposition
  2. 2 Whether the nature and substance of objections justify a costs order

Ratio Decidendi

The objections were not frivolous but contributed little to the scrutiny of a fundamentally sound scheme and were primarily aimed at extracting a better commercial deal. The court exercised its discretion to make no order as to costs, balancing the need not to discourage genuine objections with the need not to encourage opportunistic objections that add to scheme costs.

Court Disposition

No order as to costs