Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Air Products & Chemicals, Inc. v. Airgas, Inc.

BY Paul S. Ware
April 24, 2011

On Feb. 15, 2011, Chancellor William B. Chandler III of the Delaware Court of Chancery issued his ruling in the epic takeover battle between Air Products & Chemicals, Inc. and Airgas, Inc. The case posed the fundamental question regarding the allocation of power between directors and stockholders in a hostile tender offer: Who gets to decide when and if the corporation is for sale? More specifically, as framed by Chancellor Chandler, when faced with a structurally non-coercive, all-cash, fully-financed tender offer directed to the stockholders of the corporation, may a board of directors, acting in good faith and with a reasonable basis for its decision, keep a poison pill in place so as to prevent stockholders from making their own decision about whether they want to tender their shares, even if the stockholders are fully informed as to the board's views on the inadequacy of the offer? On the facts before it, the court concluded that the Airgas board could maintain its poison pill, effectively denying stockholders the right to vote on the Air Products offer, because the Airgas board had met its Unocal burden (Unocal Corp. v. Mesa Petroleum Co., 493 A.2d 946 (Del. 1985)) to articulate a legally cognizable threat posed by the offer, and the retention of the pill by the board fell within a range of reasonableness proportionate to the threat. In its analysis, the court found that the likelihood that a majority of Airgas stockholders would tender into an offer the board judged inadequate constituted a legally cognizable threat, and that the retention of the pill in the face of the threat was a proportionately reasonable response. The setting of corporate goals and the timeframe for achieving those goals remain squarely the responsibility of the board and may not be delegated to stockholders. Until further pronouncement by the Supreme Court of Delaware, the power to defeat an inadequate hostile tender offer lies with the board of directors and its judgment to maintain its poison pill.

Background

Air Products began pursuing a possible transaction with Airgas in the fall of 2009. Before going public with its offer, Air Products initially proposed to Airgas management in October 2009 an all-stock transaction at $60 per share, which was subsequently increased in December 2009 to an offer of $62 per share in a combination of stock and cash. Each of these proposals was considered, analyzed and rejected by the board of Airgas.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Yachts, Jets, Horses & Hooch: Specialized Commercial Leasing Models Image

Defining commercial real estate asset class is essentially a property explaining how it identifies — not necessarily what its original intention was or what others think it ought to be. This article discusses, from a general issue-spot and contextual analysis perspective, how lawyers ought to think about specialized leasing formats and the regulatory backdrops that may inform what the documentation needs to contain for compliance purposes.

Hyperlinked Documents: The Latest e-Discovery Challenge Image

As courts and discovery experts debate whether hyperlinked content should be treated the same as traditional attachments, legal practitioners are grappling with the technical and legal complexities of collecting, analyzing and reviewing these documents in real-world cases.

Identifying Your Practice's Differentiator Image

How to Convey Your Merits In a Way That Earns Trust, Clients and Distinctions Just as no two individuals have the exact same face, no two lawyers practice in their respective fields or serve clients in the exact same way. Think of this as a "Unique Value Proposition." Internal consideration about what you uniquely bring to your clients, colleagues, firm and industry can provide untold benefits for your law practice.

Risks and Ad Fraud Protection In Digital Advertising Image

The ever-evolving digital marketing landscape, coupled with the industry-wide adoption of programmatic advertising, poses a significant threat to the effectiveness and integrity of digital advertising campaigns. This article explores various risks to digital advertising from pixel stuffing and ad stacking to domain spoofing and bots. It will also explore what should be done to ensure ad fraud protection and improve effectiveness.

Turning Business Development Plans Into Reality Image

This article offers practical insights and best practices to navigate the path from roadmap to rainmaking, ensuring your business development efforts are not just sporadic bursts of activity, but an integrated part of your daily success.