Can PLS vary a corporate proposal which has been approved by shareholders?

Equity capital markets (ECM)

A client may change its mind at the last minute.

Shareholders’ and regulators’ approvals are required for certain corporate proposals by a public company listed on Bursa Malaysia (“𝗣𝗟𝗖”).

After all the required approvals have been obtained, the PLC may ask:

“Can we do it this way instead?”

Sometimes the client may want to utilise the proceeds raised from a corporate exercise differently from what is set out in prospectus or circular after shareholders’ approval for the corporate exercise has been obtained.

Under the Listing Requirements, the PLC must issue a circular to its shareholders and seek its shareholders’ approval if it proposes to make a material change to the utilisation of proceeds raised by the PLC from its IPO or new issue of securities which has been approved by way of specific shareholder approval.

A change to the utilisation of proceeds is considered material if such change is 25% or more of the total proceeds raised.

It is not uncommon for PLCs to go back to their shareholders to seek their approval to vary the utilisation of proceeds for corporate exercises which have been approved by their shareholders.

The Listing Requirements also require a PLC to issue a circular to its shareholders and seek its shareholders’ approval if it proposes to make a material amendment, modification or variation to a proposal which has been approved by shareholders in general meeting.

An amendment, modification or variation is considered material if it can be reasonably expected to have a material effect on the decision of a holder of securities of the PLC in relation to such proposal.

Short answer to the question in the header- yes but shareholders’ approval is required if the variation is material.

#malaysiancorporatelawyer
#equitycapitalmarkets
#listingrequirements

This post was originally posted on Linkedin on 16 February 2022. Follow me on Linkedin.

Linkedin Post
Earn-out: A postponed dispute?

An earn-out is often the solution when a buyer and seller cannot agree on price. The seller believes the business is worth more than what the buyer is willing to pay upfront. So, the parties resolve the issue by deferring the portion of the price they cannot agree on, with …

Linkedin Post
The disclosure letter: Why founders selling their companies should not treat it as an afterthought

When founders sell their companies, the scope of legal work usually focuses on the share sale and purchase agreement (SPA). The disclosure letter is sometimes treated as secondary to the SPA but it should not have been the case. The disclosure letter sets out the exceptions to the sellers’ representations …

Linkedin Post
Third-party consents in a share sale: What sellers should check before negotiating

When a company is sold, due diligence is usually conducted by the buyer, not the seller. That means the consents required from regulators, other shareholders, financiers or IP licensors to complete the sale are often only discovered when the buyer’s lawyers identify them during legal due diligence. By then, the …