i-law

Lloyd's Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly

OPPRESSION AND PREFERRED SHARES—A HEADY CANADIAN BREW

Palmer v. Carling O’Keefe Breweries of Canada Ltd.
In Canada, the beer industry is very concentrated. Hence, it was noteworthy from a number of perspectives when in 1987 the Australian brewing giant, Elders IXL, took over Carling O’Keefe, Canada’s third largest brewery, and the brewers of Black Label lager, among others. One aspect of the take-over which may well be of interest to English lawyers was a case involving an application under the Ontario Business Corporations Act (O.B.C.A.) oppression remedy by preference shareholders in Palmer v. Carling O’Keefe Breweries of Canada Ltd.1
The manner in which the take-over occurred was that Elders set up IXL Holdings Canada (IXL) to buy out Canada O’Keefe Ltd. (COL), which in turn owned Carling O’Keefe Breweries (COB), the operating company. IXL borrowed $400 million (Canadian) to finance the take-over, and successfully acquired all of the common shares of COL. Elders then sought to reorganize the three companies. This could have been done with minimal difficulty, except for the fact that IXL had not acquired the series A and series B preference shares of COL, which were still held by independent shareholders. The logical course of action would have been to redeem the preferred shares. The problem was that the redemption price of the preferred shares was significantly higher than the price of the shares on the stock exchange, with the total difference in value being over $40 million.
Elders’ response was to try to lower the redemption price of the preferred shares. Shareholder approval was required under the O.B.C.A. for this to occur, however, as variations of class rights must be approved by the class concerned. The series B shareholders rejected the offer, even though the proposed price was significantly higher than the market price. Then, Deacon Morgan, an investment dealer, purchased a substantial amount of series A shares on the market, speculating that Elders would have to pay out the full redemption price for the preferred shares. The series A shareholders subsequently rejected Elders’ offer, primarily through the efforts of Deacon Morgan.
Elders then decided to amalgamate IXL, COL and COB. Amalgamation is a statutory procedure existing under the O.B.C.A., which allows two or more companies to be brought together to operate as a single company.2 This procedure has no direct equivalent in English or American company law. The closest equivalent in England is an amalgamation under s. 425 of the Companies Act 1985.3 The effect, however, is different, as under the O.B.C.A. procedure the new company is in fact composed of the amalgamated companies rather than being a new company set up to absorb the old companies. Also, unlike with the amalgamation procedure under s. 425, no judicial approval is needed for an amalgamation under the O.B.C.A. Instead, protection is given to dissenting shareholders by giving them the right to

411

The rest of this document is only available to i-law.com online subscribers.

If you are already a subscriber, click Log In button.

Copyright © 2024 Maritime Insights & Intelligence Limited. Maritime Insights & Intelligence Limited is registered in England and Wales with company number 13831625 and address 5th Floor, 10 St Bride Street, London, EC4A 4AD, United Kingdom. Lloyd's List Intelligence is a trading name of Maritime Insights & Intelligence Limited.

Lloyd's is the registered trademark of the Society Incorporated by the Lloyd's Act 1871 by the name of Lloyd's.