This last decision, in particular, obtained a decline in the legal community. And, not surprisingly, the shareholders of Musk and Tesla came down. “”Absolute corruption,Musk wrote on the decision.
Other blows followed. In a major decision last year, the vice -chancellor of Delaware Court, J. Travis Laster, judged that company councils could not effectively put power on key issues – such as transactions and the remuneration of managers – to a majority shareholder. This decision, which was focused on power bequeathed by the members of the board of directors in Ken Moelis, the majority shareholder of the investment bank Moelis, put Delaware and its advisers in a Tizzy.
Then, in an extraordinary decision, the court actually defined this decision, passing an amendment this summer which allowed Companies to conclude such agreements. A heated debate on this amendment on the prosecution of the state legislature quickly became a controversial argument on the management of the Delaware company law.
“Currently, the business market does not feel good about Delaware,” said a former state judge, William Chandler, on the floor of the room, pinning this feeling about “uncertainty and The unpredictability of some decisions of only two judges, ”refer to McCormick and Laster.
This debate has become a soap for business interests. The professors of the Faculty of Law, who ardently feel the law – and, perhaps, more cynically, of their relationship with the judges of Delaware – wrote passionate defenses. The judges, faced with disproportionate dazzling, threw social networks punch.