SlideShare ist ein Scribd-Unternehmen logo
1 von 3
Downloaden Sie, um offline zu lesen
1
Delaware Court of Chancery Applies Entire Fairness Standard to
Director Equity Grants
May 26, 2015
The Delaware Court of Chancery recently held that equity grants to non-employee directors of Citrix
Systems, Inc. (“Citrix” or the “Company”) approved by the board of director’s compensation committee
(the “Committee”) were subject to an entire fairness standard of review, rather than the deferential
business judgment rule, because the Committee’s decisions were made (i) by non-employee directors
who would receive the compensation and (ii) pursuant to a stock plan which did not include any
“meaningful” limits on director compensation payable under the plan. Although the case was before the
Court on a motion to dismiss, its holding nonetheless suggests increasing scrutiny by Delaware courts
under certain circumstances of equity awards by directors to directors.
The case, Calma v. Templeton et al.1
, is a stockholder derivative action challenging restricted stock unit
(“RSU”) awards to eight non-employee directors of Citrix, which were granted under the Company’s
2005 Equity Incentive Plan (the “Plan”). The Court denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss the
plaintiff’s claim that members of the Company’s board breached their fiduciary duties (and were unjustly
enriched) in awarding compensation to directors under the Plan. The Company’s stockholders had
previously approved the Plan, which provided for equity awards to eligible officers, employees,
consultants and advisors of the Company and, like many public company stock plans, provided that no
participant could receive grants exceeding more than, in this case, one million shares (or RSUs) per year.
However, the Plan did not impose any other individual limits on awards, including grants to non-
employee directors. As a result, the Court held that stockholder approval of the Plan could not act as a
ratification of the director equity grants at issue because the Plan did not include enough specificity as to
“the magnitude of compensation for the Company’s non-employee directors.”2
The Court distinguished
the case from other Delaware cases where stockholders approved compensation plans that established
specific awards to be granted to directors, imposed ceilings on periodic awards or otherwise included
specific details as to the awards to be granted.
In terms of analyzing the entire fairness of the director compensation, the parties focused on whether the
Company’s non-employee director compensation practices were in line with those of the Company’s
proxy peer group. The Court noted that the Committee, in setting director compensation, relied on a peer
group that the plaintiff argued should not have included companies with much higher market
capitalizations, revenue and net income than Citrix. The plaintiff contended that if such companies were
excluded from Citrix’s peer group, the compensation awarded to Citrix’s non-employee directors would
appear excessive in comparison to the compensation awarded to directors at Citrix’s peer companies.
1
C.A. No. 9579-CB, 2015 WL 1951930 (Del. Ch. Apr. 30, 2015). A link to the opinion may be found here:
http://courts.delaware.gov/opinions/(1nwswx45eocieo45fxqykg55)/download.aspx?ID=223030 (May 26, 2015).
2
Id. at 38.
2
In denying the motion to dismiss, the Court found that the plaintiff “raised meaningful questions as to
whether certain companies with considerably higher market capitalizations … should be included in the
peer group.”3
Although the Court refused to dismiss the plaintiff’s breach of fiduciary duty and unjust
enrichment claims, it did dismiss the plaintiff’s corporate waste claim, agreeing with the defendants that
the plaintiff had not established that the director compensation “was so one-sided that no reasonable
business person could conclude that the Company received adequate consideration.”4
Key Considerations
This case is an important reminder to Delaware companies -- and companies incorporated in many
jurisdictions that treat Delaware corporate jurisprudence as persuasive authority -- that director
compensation may be challenged under the heightened entire fairness standard, rather than the business
judgment standard, unless stockholders have approved meaningful and specific limits on the amount of
director compensation. Although Calma and a line of related cases in Delaware address equity awards,
the analysis in these cases may apply to cash compensation as well. Given the preliminary nature of the
Calma case and a similar derivative action pending in Delaware against Facebook5
, we will continue to
monitor developments in this area. In the meantime, companies should carefully consider the following
when making non-employee director compensation decisions:
• Boards and compensation committees should act reasonably and thoughtfully in setting director
compensation, using appropriate, rigorous and objective peer group data and outside advisers,
including independent compensation consultants.
• A company planning to seek stockholder approval of an equity compensation plan in which
directors participate should consider including a meaningful or specific limit on non-employee
director awards. This consideration should continue to be weighed against the company’s desire
for flexibility in setting director compensation. Although years ago many public companies
established separate, formulaic director equity compensation programs, in recent years, more
companies have granted director equity awards under a more flexible “omnibus” stock incentive
plan in which employees and other service providers also participate, often with a generous
participant award limitation (required under Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986, as amended, for covered employees). The Calma case and related precedents suggest that
the pendulum may be swinging back towards imposing individual director award limitations.
Public companies should also keep in mind that adding or changing director limits in an equity
3
Id. at 41.
4
Id. at 42.
5
Because the Calma decision resolved a procedural issue, the case, unless settled, will proceed on the merits. In
June 2014, a stockholder filed a similar derivative action on behalf of Facebook alleging that the Facebook board
breached its fiduciary duties by awarding themselves excessive compensation under Facebook’s equity incentive
plan, which included an individual limit of 2.5 million shares but no other meaningful or specific limits on director
compensation. Complaint, Espinoza v. Zuckerberg et al., C.A. No 9745 (Del. Ch. filed June 6, 2014). The
Facebook case has not yet been decided on the merits, as the defendants have filed a motion to dismiss and for
summary judgment, which is still pending.
3
plan may, depending upon plan terms and applicable stock exchange rules, require stockholder
approval.
• A company contemplating an increase to the compensation granted to non-employee directors
should consider whether to obtain stockholder approval of specific amounts of or limits to
director compensation, and if approval is not sought, provide a reasonable and thorough
explanation for the change in director compensation in its proxy statement. As a general matter,
we would recommend imposing meaningful but flexible director equity award limits in a plan
over seeking stockholder approval of specific amounts of director compensation. However, if a
stand-alone proposal on director compensation is considered, companies should also be mindful
that proxy advisory firms such as Institutional Shareholder Services and Glass Lewis would
likely not support a proposal if it is viewed as a mechanism for excessive compensation.
If you have any questions about the issues discussed in this alert, please contact Vivian L. Coates, the
principal drafter of this client alert, at VCoates@wcsr.com or 336.721.3727, or you may contact the
Womble Carlyle attorney with whom you usually work or one of our Corporate and Securities attorneys.
__________________
Womble Carlyle client alerts are intended to provide general information about significant legal
developments and should not be construed as legal advice regarding any specific facts and
circumstances, nor should they be construed as advertisements for legal services.
IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform
you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this communication (or in any attachment) is not intended or
written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal
Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter
addressed in this communication (or in any attachment).
WCSR 34225016v1

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

The Summary Approval Process
The Summary Approval ProcessThe Summary Approval Process
The Summary Approval ProcessMatheson Law Firm
 
CHANGES IN COMPANY CAPITAL STRUCTURE & RESTRUCTURING
CHANGES IN COMPANY CAPITAL STRUCTURE & RESTRUCTURINGCHANGES IN COMPANY CAPITAL STRUCTURE & RESTRUCTURING
CHANGES IN COMPANY CAPITAL STRUCTURE & RESTRUCTURINGPOLYTECHNIC MELAKA
 
Backdating stirs up controversy
Backdating stirs up controversy  Backdating stirs up controversy
Backdating stirs up controversy LawCrossing
 
Ten Types of Business Financing You May Not Have Tried
Ten Types of Business Financing You May Not Have TriedTen Types of Business Financing You May Not Have Tried
Ten Types of Business Financing You May Not Have TriedInsideUp
 
8 Tips for Avoiding Insolvency Land Mines
8 Tips for Avoiding Insolvency Land Mines8 Tips for Avoiding Insolvency Land Mines
8 Tips for Avoiding Insolvency Land MinesJames Baer
 
Shareholder agreement questionnaire final 060112
Shareholder agreement questionnaire   final 060112Shareholder agreement questionnaire   final 060112
Shareholder agreement questionnaire final 060112Cummings
 
Financial distress and your safety net during COVID-19
Financial distress and your safety net during COVID-19Financial distress and your safety net during COVID-19
Financial distress and your safety net during COVID-19Redchip
 
Financing options to help your business grow
Financing options to help your business growFinancing options to help your business grow
Financing options to help your business growInsideUp
 
Topic 9 company_reconstruction_a141
Topic 9 company_reconstruction_a141Topic 9 company_reconstruction_a141
Topic 9 company_reconstruction_a141kim rae KI
 
Petefish Law - Joint Venturing & Teaming Presentation
Petefish Law - Joint Venturing & Teaming PresentationPetefish Law - Joint Venturing & Teaming Presentation
Petefish Law - Joint Venturing & Teaming Presentationevanfas
 
Webinar slides 13 dec 2011 (bwf)- 858214
Webinar slides   13 dec 2011 (bwf)- 858214Webinar slides   13 dec 2011 (bwf)- 858214
Webinar slides 13 dec 2011 (bwf)- 858214sbriscoe
 
Client Alert: November 2011
Client Alert: November 2011Client Alert: November 2011
Client Alert: November 2011SES Advisors
 
Why Have Companies Been Issuing Hybrids - Jan 2007
Why Have Companies Been Issuing Hybrids - Jan 2007Why Have Companies Been Issuing Hybrids - Jan 2007
Why Have Companies Been Issuing Hybrids - Jan 2007Adrian Crockett, CFA
 

Was ist angesagt? (20)

The Summary Approval Process
The Summary Approval ProcessThe Summary Approval Process
The Summary Approval Process
 
CHANGES IN COMPANY CAPITAL STRUCTURE & RESTRUCTURING
CHANGES IN COMPANY CAPITAL STRUCTURE & RESTRUCTURINGCHANGES IN COMPANY CAPITAL STRUCTURE & RESTRUCTURING
CHANGES IN COMPANY CAPITAL STRUCTURE & RESTRUCTURING
 
Backdating stirs up controversy
Backdating stirs up controversy  Backdating stirs up controversy
Backdating stirs up controversy
 
Tc12 a1
Tc12 a1Tc12 a1
Tc12 a1
 
Ten Types of Business Financing You May Not Have Tried
Ten Types of Business Financing You May Not Have TriedTen Types of Business Financing You May Not Have Tried
Ten Types of Business Financing You May Not Have Tried
 
8 Tips for Avoiding Insolvency Land Mines
8 Tips for Avoiding Insolvency Land Mines8 Tips for Avoiding Insolvency Land Mines
8 Tips for Avoiding Insolvency Land Mines
 
Shareholder agreement questionnaire final 060112
Shareholder agreement questionnaire   final 060112Shareholder agreement questionnaire   final 060112
Shareholder agreement questionnaire final 060112
 
Financial distress and your safety net during COVID-19
Financial distress and your safety net during COVID-19Financial distress and your safety net during COVID-19
Financial distress and your safety net during COVID-19
 
Financing options to help your business grow
Financing options to help your business growFinancing options to help your business grow
Financing options to help your business grow
 
Topic 9 company_reconstruction_a141
Topic 9 company_reconstruction_a141Topic 9 company_reconstruction_a141
Topic 9 company_reconstruction_a141
 
ESOP%20Issues%2011-14%20v7
ESOP%20Issues%2011-14%20v7ESOP%20Issues%2011-14%20v7
ESOP%20Issues%2011-14%20v7
 
Petefish Law - Joint Venturing & Teaming Presentation
Petefish Law - Joint Venturing & Teaming PresentationPetefish Law - Joint Venturing & Teaming Presentation
Petefish Law - Joint Venturing & Teaming Presentation
 
The Principal Financial Group 101
The Principal Financial Group 101The Principal Financial Group 101
The Principal Financial Group 101
 
ICSA Irish Region Directors' Duties (Cork) CPD event, 10 April 2018
ICSA Irish Region Directors' Duties (Cork) CPD event, 10 April 2018ICSA Irish Region Directors' Duties (Cork) CPD event, 10 April 2018
ICSA Irish Region Directors' Duties (Cork) CPD event, 10 April 2018
 
Webinar slides 13 dec 2011 (bwf)- 858214
Webinar slides   13 dec 2011 (bwf)- 858214Webinar slides   13 dec 2011 (bwf)- 858214
Webinar slides 13 dec 2011 (bwf)- 858214
 
Cf report
Cf reportCf report
Cf report
 
Corporate Restructuring
Corporate RestructuringCorporate Restructuring
Corporate Restructuring
 
Client Alert: November 2011
Client Alert: November 2011Client Alert: November 2011
Client Alert: November 2011
 
The Principal Financial Group 101
The Principal Financial Group 101The Principal Financial Group 101
The Principal Financial Group 101
 
Why Have Companies Been Issuing Hybrids - Jan 2007
Why Have Companies Been Issuing Hybrids - Jan 2007Why Have Companies Been Issuing Hybrids - Jan 2007
Why Have Companies Been Issuing Hybrids - Jan 2007
 

Andere mochten auch

Sampurna Arogyasathi Namasmarn Marathi Bestseller Dr. Shriniwas Kashalikar
Sampurna Arogyasathi Namasmarn Marathi Bestseller Dr. Shriniwas KashalikarSampurna Arogyasathi Namasmarn Marathi Bestseller Dr. Shriniwas Kashalikar
Sampurna Arogyasathi Namasmarn Marathi Bestseller Dr. Shriniwas Kashalikarguestad0b03
 
Shambhvi A Bestseller Marathi Novel Dr. Shriniwas Kashalikar
Shambhvi  A Bestseller Marathi Novel Dr. Shriniwas KashalikarShambhvi  A Bestseller Marathi Novel Dr. Shriniwas Kashalikar
Shambhvi A Bestseller Marathi Novel Dr. Shriniwas Kashalikaramolsawarkar
 
Menace Of Cholera Marathi Bestseller Dr. Shriniwas Kashalikar
Menace Of Cholera Marathi Bestseller Dr. Shriniwas KashalikarMenace Of Cholera Marathi Bestseller Dr. Shriniwas Kashalikar
Menace Of Cholera Marathi Bestseller Dr. Shriniwas Kashalikaramolsawarkar
 
Trademarks and-brands-seminar
Trademarks and-brands-seminarTrademarks and-brands-seminar
Trademarks and-brands-seminarNSTDA THAILAND
 
Actuacions per la sensibilització i educació ambiental al voltant de l'estany...
Actuacions per la sensibilització i educació ambiental al voltant de l'estany...Actuacions per la sensibilització i educació ambiental al voltant de l'estany...
Actuacions per la sensibilització i educació ambiental al voltant de l'estany...Medi Ambient. Generalitat de Catalunya
 
Ankur (Bestseller Marathi Poetry) Dr. Shriiwas Kashalikar
Ankur (Bestseller Marathi Poetry) Dr. Shriiwas KashalikarAnkur (Bestseller Marathi Poetry) Dr. Shriiwas Kashalikar
Ankur (Bestseller Marathi Poetry) Dr. Shriiwas Kashalikaramolsawarkar
 
Approccio sistemico per la sicurezza delle gallerie in caso di incendio
Approccio sistemico per la sicurezza delle gallerie in caso di incendioApproccio sistemico per la sicurezza delle gallerie in caso di incendio
Approccio sistemico per la sicurezza delle gallerie in caso di incendioFranco Bontempi
 
Pla específic de Protecció i Suport als Establiments Emblemàtics
Pla específic de Protecció i Suport als Establiments EmblemàticsPla específic de Protecció i Suport als Establiments Emblemàtics
Pla específic de Protecció i Suport als Establiments EmblemàticsAjuntament de Barcelona
 
Chaitanyasadhana Marathi Bestseller On Superhealth Dr. Shriniwas Kashalikar ...
Chaitanyasadhana Marathi Bestseller On Superhealth  Dr. Shriniwas Kashalikar ...Chaitanyasadhana Marathi Bestseller On Superhealth  Dr. Shriniwas Kashalikar ...
Chaitanyasadhana Marathi Bestseller On Superhealth Dr. Shriniwas Kashalikar ...amolsawarkar
 
SVN, Eclipse e Jira
SVN, Eclipse e JiraSVN, Eclipse e Jira
SVN, Eclipse e JiraMeetweb
 
P. Farina Misurare l’invisibile: l’esperienza dell’Osservatorio lombardo sull...
P. Farina Misurare l’invisibile: l’esperienza dell’Osservatorio lombardo sull...P. Farina Misurare l’invisibile: l’esperienza dell’Osservatorio lombardo sull...
P. Farina Misurare l’invisibile: l’esperienza dell’Osservatorio lombardo sull...Istituto nazionale di statistica
 
Apresentação Condomínio Clima Botanico
Apresentação Condomínio Clima Botanico Apresentação Condomínio Clima Botanico
Apresentação Condomínio Clima Botanico Gabriel Santa Rosa
 
EB1 do Montelhão - Happy Children's Day
EB1 do Montelhão - Happy Children's DayEB1 do Montelhão - Happy Children's Day
EB1 do Montelhão - Happy Children's DayAEC-Inglês
 

Andere mochten auch (20)

Geralnews24fev
Geralnews24fevGeralnews24fev
Geralnews24fev
 
Sampurna Arogyasathi Namasmarn Marathi Bestseller Dr. Shriniwas Kashalikar
Sampurna Arogyasathi Namasmarn Marathi Bestseller Dr. Shriniwas KashalikarSampurna Arogyasathi Namasmarn Marathi Bestseller Dr. Shriniwas Kashalikar
Sampurna Arogyasathi Namasmarn Marathi Bestseller Dr. Shriniwas Kashalikar
 
Shambhvi A Bestseller Marathi Novel Dr. Shriniwas Kashalikar
Shambhvi  A Bestseller Marathi Novel Dr. Shriniwas KashalikarShambhvi  A Bestseller Marathi Novel Dr. Shriniwas Kashalikar
Shambhvi A Bestseller Marathi Novel Dr. Shriniwas Kashalikar
 
Кроніка грамадскага жыцця Гарадзеншчыны
Кроніка грамадскага жыцця ГарадзеншчыныКроніка грамадскага жыцця Гарадзеншчыны
Кроніка грамадскага жыцця Гарадзеншчыны
 
Menace Of Cholera Marathi Bestseller Dr. Shriniwas Kashalikar
Menace Of Cholera Marathi Bestseller Dr. Shriniwas KashalikarMenace Of Cholera Marathi Bestseller Dr. Shriniwas Kashalikar
Menace Of Cholera Marathi Bestseller Dr. Shriniwas Kashalikar
 
Trab. josé
Trab. joséTrab. josé
Trab. josé
 
Final Cut Studio Training
Final Cut Studio TrainingFinal Cut Studio Training
Final Cut Studio Training
 
Love is in the air
Love is in the airLove is in the air
Love is in the air
 
Trademarks and-brands-seminar
Trademarks and-brands-seminarTrademarks and-brands-seminar
Trademarks and-brands-seminar
 
Actuacions per la sensibilització i educació ambiental al voltant de l'estany...
Actuacions per la sensibilització i educació ambiental al voltant de l'estany...Actuacions per la sensibilització i educació ambiental al voltant de l'estany...
Actuacions per la sensibilització i educació ambiental al voltant de l'estany...
 
Semana da Leitura
Semana da LeituraSemana da Leitura
Semana da Leitura
 
Ankur (Bestseller Marathi Poetry) Dr. Shriiwas Kashalikar
Ankur (Bestseller Marathi Poetry) Dr. Shriiwas KashalikarAnkur (Bestseller Marathi Poetry) Dr. Shriiwas Kashalikar
Ankur (Bestseller Marathi Poetry) Dr. Shriiwas Kashalikar
 
Approccio sistemico per la sicurezza delle gallerie in caso di incendio
Approccio sistemico per la sicurezza delle gallerie in caso di incendioApproccio sistemico per la sicurezza delle gallerie in caso di incendio
Approccio sistemico per la sicurezza delle gallerie in caso di incendio
 
Pla específic de Protecció i Suport als Establiments Emblemàtics
Pla específic de Protecció i Suport als Establiments EmblemàticsPla específic de Protecció i Suport als Establiments Emblemàtics
Pla específic de Protecció i Suport als Establiments Emblemàtics
 
Chaitanyasadhana Marathi Bestseller On Superhealth Dr. Shriniwas Kashalikar ...
Chaitanyasadhana Marathi Bestseller On Superhealth  Dr. Shriniwas Kashalikar ...Chaitanyasadhana Marathi Bestseller On Superhealth  Dr. Shriniwas Kashalikar ...
Chaitanyasadhana Marathi Bestseller On Superhealth Dr. Shriniwas Kashalikar ...
 
Expotita
ExpotitaExpotita
Expotita
 
SVN, Eclipse e Jira
SVN, Eclipse e JiraSVN, Eclipse e Jira
SVN, Eclipse e Jira
 
P. Farina Misurare l’invisibile: l’esperienza dell’Osservatorio lombardo sull...
P. Farina Misurare l’invisibile: l’esperienza dell’Osservatorio lombardo sull...P. Farina Misurare l’invisibile: l’esperienza dell’Osservatorio lombardo sull...
P. Farina Misurare l’invisibile: l’esperienza dell’Osservatorio lombardo sull...
 
Apresentação Condomínio Clima Botanico
Apresentação Condomínio Clima Botanico Apresentação Condomínio Clima Botanico
Apresentação Condomínio Clima Botanico
 
EB1 do Montelhão - Happy Children's Day
EB1 do Montelhão - Happy Children's DayEB1 do Montelhão - Happy Children's Day
EB1 do Montelhão - Happy Children's Day
 

Ähnlich wie Client Alert - Director Equity Grants

Discuss bankrupcity, reorganization, and liquidation
Discuss bankrupcity, reorganization, and liquidationDiscuss bankrupcity, reorganization, and liquidation
Discuss bankrupcity, reorganization, and liquidationDina Erliana
 
Five Common Questions About Deferred Compensation
Five Common Questions About Deferred CompensationFive Common Questions About Deferred Compensation
Five Common Questions About Deferred CompensationCBIZ, Inc.
 
Dividend Decisions
Dividend DecisionsDividend Decisions
Dividend DecisionsKaushik Deb
 
Legal Assignment
Legal AssignmentLegal Assignment
Legal AssignmentJoy Smith
 
AUDITING Accounts PayableDiscussion TopicIm Done Top .docx
AUDITING  Accounts PayableDiscussion TopicIm Done Top .docxAUDITING  Accounts PayableDiscussion TopicIm Done Top .docx
AUDITING Accounts PayableDiscussion TopicIm Done Top .docxrock73
 
August 2012 Just Out Of Reish Plan Sponsor
August 2012 Just Out Of Reish Plan SponsorAugust 2012 Just Out Of Reish Plan Sponsor
August 2012 Just Out Of Reish Plan Sponsorfredreish
 
Assignment-2_Capital Structure.docx
Assignment-2_Capital Structure.docxAssignment-2_Capital Structure.docx
Assignment-2_Capital Structure.docxKameshwariPurusothma
 
Corporate restructuring in malaysia
Corporate restructuring in malaysiaCorporate restructuring in malaysia
Corporate restructuring in malaysiageneva advisory
 
The Diamond Datascram Diaries: Diamond Datascram Dominance
The Diamond Datascram Diaries: Diamond Datascram DominanceThe Diamond Datascram Diaries: Diamond Datascram Dominance
The Diamond Datascram Diaries: Diamond Datascram DominancePolsinelli PC
 
Executive compensation march_13_2013
Executive compensation march_13_2013Executive compensation march_13_2013
Executive compensation march_13_2013Hiatus51
 
What Was the FASB Thinking?
What Was the FASB Thinking? What Was the FASB Thinking?
What Was the FASB Thinking? DecosimoCPAs
 
Mercer Capital's Portfolio Valuation: Private Equity and Venture Capital Mark...
Mercer Capital's Portfolio Valuation: Private Equity and Venture Capital Mark...Mercer Capital's Portfolio Valuation: Private Equity and Venture Capital Mark...
Mercer Capital's Portfolio Valuation: Private Equity and Venture Capital Mark...Mercer Capital
 
PE Expense Allocation Article (00299582x9ED28)
PE Expense Allocation Article (00299582x9ED28)PE Expense Allocation Article (00299582x9ED28)
PE Expense Allocation Article (00299582x9ED28)John T. Araneo
 
Financing Alternatives For Government Contractors
Financing Alternatives For Government ContractorsFinancing Alternatives For Government Contractors
Financing Alternatives For Government ContractorsPrivia LLC
 
Corporate Debt Restructuring Plan for Turn around
Corporate Debt Restructuring Plan for Turn aroundCorporate Debt Restructuring Plan for Turn around
Corporate Debt Restructuring Plan for Turn aroundPeter Chemuigut
 
1DIVIDENDS, REDEMPTION, PARTY LOSSESAs
1DIVIDENDS, REDEMPTION, PARTY LOSSESAs1DIVIDENDS, REDEMPTION, PARTY LOSSESAs
1DIVIDENDS, REDEMPTION, PARTY LOSSESAsEttaBenton28
 
Matters of Interest - First Quarter 2016
Matters of Interest - First Quarter 2016Matters of Interest - First Quarter 2016
Matters of Interest - First Quarter 2016theBurgessGroup
 

Ähnlich wie Client Alert - Director Equity Grants (20)

Discuss bankrupcity, reorganization, and liquidation
Discuss bankrupcity, reorganization, and liquidationDiscuss bankrupcity, reorganization, and liquidation
Discuss bankrupcity, reorganization, and liquidation
 
Five Common Questions About Deferred Compensation
Five Common Questions About Deferred CompensationFive Common Questions About Deferred Compensation
Five Common Questions About Deferred Compensation
 
Dividend Decisions
Dividend DecisionsDividend Decisions
Dividend Decisions
 
Legal Assignment
Legal AssignmentLegal Assignment
Legal Assignment
 
AUDITING Accounts PayableDiscussion TopicIm Done Top .docx
AUDITING  Accounts PayableDiscussion TopicIm Done Top .docxAUDITING  Accounts PayableDiscussion TopicIm Done Top .docx
AUDITING Accounts PayableDiscussion TopicIm Done Top .docx
 
120301 WA Business News Opinion
120301 WA Business News Opinion120301 WA Business News Opinion
120301 WA Business News Opinion
 
August 2012 Just Out Of Reish Plan Sponsor
August 2012 Just Out Of Reish Plan SponsorAugust 2012 Just Out Of Reish Plan Sponsor
August 2012 Just Out Of Reish Plan Sponsor
 
Assignment-2_Capital Structure.docx
Assignment-2_Capital Structure.docxAssignment-2_Capital Structure.docx
Assignment-2_Capital Structure.docx
 
Corporate restructuring in malaysia
Corporate restructuring in malaysiaCorporate restructuring in malaysia
Corporate restructuring in malaysia
 
The Diamond Datascram Diaries: Diamond Datascram Dominance
The Diamond Datascram Diaries: Diamond Datascram DominanceThe Diamond Datascram Diaries: Diamond Datascram Dominance
The Diamond Datascram Diaries: Diamond Datascram Dominance
 
Taking Private Out of Private Equity
Taking Private Out of Private EquityTaking Private Out of Private Equity
Taking Private Out of Private Equity
 
Executive compensation march_13_2013
Executive compensation march_13_2013Executive compensation march_13_2013
Executive compensation march_13_2013
 
What Was the FASB Thinking?
What Was the FASB Thinking? What Was the FASB Thinking?
What Was the FASB Thinking?
 
Mercer Capital's Portfolio Valuation: Private Equity and Venture Capital Mark...
Mercer Capital's Portfolio Valuation: Private Equity and Venture Capital Mark...Mercer Capital's Portfolio Valuation: Private Equity and Venture Capital Mark...
Mercer Capital's Portfolio Valuation: Private Equity and Venture Capital Mark...
 
PE Expense Allocation Article (00299582x9ED28)
PE Expense Allocation Article (00299582x9ED28)PE Expense Allocation Article (00299582x9ED28)
PE Expense Allocation Article (00299582x9ED28)
 
Financing Alternatives For Government Contractors
Financing Alternatives For Government ContractorsFinancing Alternatives For Government Contractors
Financing Alternatives For Government Contractors
 
Corporate Debt Restructuring Plan for Turn around
Corporate Debt Restructuring Plan for Turn aroundCorporate Debt Restructuring Plan for Turn around
Corporate Debt Restructuring Plan for Turn around
 
Pledge (and Hedge) Allegiance to the Company
Pledge (and Hedge) Allegiance to the Company Pledge (and Hedge) Allegiance to the Company
Pledge (and Hedge) Allegiance to the Company
 
1DIVIDENDS, REDEMPTION, PARTY LOSSESAs
1DIVIDENDS, REDEMPTION, PARTY LOSSESAs1DIVIDENDS, REDEMPTION, PARTY LOSSESAs
1DIVIDENDS, REDEMPTION, PARTY LOSSESAs
 
Matters of Interest - First Quarter 2016
Matters of Interest - First Quarter 2016Matters of Interest - First Quarter 2016
Matters of Interest - First Quarter 2016
 

Client Alert - Director Equity Grants

  • 1. 1 Delaware Court of Chancery Applies Entire Fairness Standard to Director Equity Grants May 26, 2015 The Delaware Court of Chancery recently held that equity grants to non-employee directors of Citrix Systems, Inc. (“Citrix” or the “Company”) approved by the board of director’s compensation committee (the “Committee”) were subject to an entire fairness standard of review, rather than the deferential business judgment rule, because the Committee’s decisions were made (i) by non-employee directors who would receive the compensation and (ii) pursuant to a stock plan which did not include any “meaningful” limits on director compensation payable under the plan. Although the case was before the Court on a motion to dismiss, its holding nonetheless suggests increasing scrutiny by Delaware courts under certain circumstances of equity awards by directors to directors. The case, Calma v. Templeton et al.1 , is a stockholder derivative action challenging restricted stock unit (“RSU”) awards to eight non-employee directors of Citrix, which were granted under the Company’s 2005 Equity Incentive Plan (the “Plan”). The Court denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s claim that members of the Company’s board breached their fiduciary duties (and were unjustly enriched) in awarding compensation to directors under the Plan. The Company’s stockholders had previously approved the Plan, which provided for equity awards to eligible officers, employees, consultants and advisors of the Company and, like many public company stock plans, provided that no participant could receive grants exceeding more than, in this case, one million shares (or RSUs) per year. However, the Plan did not impose any other individual limits on awards, including grants to non- employee directors. As a result, the Court held that stockholder approval of the Plan could not act as a ratification of the director equity grants at issue because the Plan did not include enough specificity as to “the magnitude of compensation for the Company’s non-employee directors.”2 The Court distinguished the case from other Delaware cases where stockholders approved compensation plans that established specific awards to be granted to directors, imposed ceilings on periodic awards or otherwise included specific details as to the awards to be granted. In terms of analyzing the entire fairness of the director compensation, the parties focused on whether the Company’s non-employee director compensation practices were in line with those of the Company’s proxy peer group. The Court noted that the Committee, in setting director compensation, relied on a peer group that the plaintiff argued should not have included companies with much higher market capitalizations, revenue and net income than Citrix. The plaintiff contended that if such companies were excluded from Citrix’s peer group, the compensation awarded to Citrix’s non-employee directors would appear excessive in comparison to the compensation awarded to directors at Citrix’s peer companies. 1 C.A. No. 9579-CB, 2015 WL 1951930 (Del. Ch. Apr. 30, 2015). A link to the opinion may be found here: http://courts.delaware.gov/opinions/(1nwswx45eocieo45fxqykg55)/download.aspx?ID=223030 (May 26, 2015). 2 Id. at 38.
  • 2. 2 In denying the motion to dismiss, the Court found that the plaintiff “raised meaningful questions as to whether certain companies with considerably higher market capitalizations … should be included in the peer group.”3 Although the Court refused to dismiss the plaintiff’s breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment claims, it did dismiss the plaintiff’s corporate waste claim, agreeing with the defendants that the plaintiff had not established that the director compensation “was so one-sided that no reasonable business person could conclude that the Company received adequate consideration.”4 Key Considerations This case is an important reminder to Delaware companies -- and companies incorporated in many jurisdictions that treat Delaware corporate jurisprudence as persuasive authority -- that director compensation may be challenged under the heightened entire fairness standard, rather than the business judgment standard, unless stockholders have approved meaningful and specific limits on the amount of director compensation. Although Calma and a line of related cases in Delaware address equity awards, the analysis in these cases may apply to cash compensation as well. Given the preliminary nature of the Calma case and a similar derivative action pending in Delaware against Facebook5 , we will continue to monitor developments in this area. In the meantime, companies should carefully consider the following when making non-employee director compensation decisions: • Boards and compensation committees should act reasonably and thoughtfully in setting director compensation, using appropriate, rigorous and objective peer group data and outside advisers, including independent compensation consultants. • A company planning to seek stockholder approval of an equity compensation plan in which directors participate should consider including a meaningful or specific limit on non-employee director awards. This consideration should continue to be weighed against the company’s desire for flexibility in setting director compensation. Although years ago many public companies established separate, formulaic director equity compensation programs, in recent years, more companies have granted director equity awards under a more flexible “omnibus” stock incentive plan in which employees and other service providers also participate, often with a generous participant award limitation (required under Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, for covered employees). The Calma case and related precedents suggest that the pendulum may be swinging back towards imposing individual director award limitations. Public companies should also keep in mind that adding or changing director limits in an equity 3 Id. at 41. 4 Id. at 42. 5 Because the Calma decision resolved a procedural issue, the case, unless settled, will proceed on the merits. In June 2014, a stockholder filed a similar derivative action on behalf of Facebook alleging that the Facebook board breached its fiduciary duties by awarding themselves excessive compensation under Facebook’s equity incentive plan, which included an individual limit of 2.5 million shares but no other meaningful or specific limits on director compensation. Complaint, Espinoza v. Zuckerberg et al., C.A. No 9745 (Del. Ch. filed June 6, 2014). The Facebook case has not yet been decided on the merits, as the defendants have filed a motion to dismiss and for summary judgment, which is still pending.
  • 3. 3 plan may, depending upon plan terms and applicable stock exchange rules, require stockholder approval. • A company contemplating an increase to the compensation granted to non-employee directors should consider whether to obtain stockholder approval of specific amounts of or limits to director compensation, and if approval is not sought, provide a reasonable and thorough explanation for the change in director compensation in its proxy statement. As a general matter, we would recommend imposing meaningful but flexible director equity award limits in a plan over seeking stockholder approval of specific amounts of director compensation. However, if a stand-alone proposal on director compensation is considered, companies should also be mindful that proxy advisory firms such as Institutional Shareholder Services and Glass Lewis would likely not support a proposal if it is viewed as a mechanism for excessive compensation. If you have any questions about the issues discussed in this alert, please contact Vivian L. Coates, the principal drafter of this client alert, at VCoates@wcsr.com or 336.721.3727, or you may contact the Womble Carlyle attorney with whom you usually work or one of our Corporate and Securities attorneys. __________________ Womble Carlyle client alerts are intended to provide general information about significant legal developments and should not be construed as legal advice regarding any specific facts and circumstances, nor should they be construed as advertisements for legal services. IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this communication (or in any attachment) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed in this communication (or in any attachment). WCSR 34225016v1