X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

The UK government must tread a fine line between scaring off potential investors and protecting the UK’s national security when formulating new takeover rules, according to partners.

M&A and infrastructure partners warn that the government faces a difficult balancing act as it formulates new the takeover rules that are intended to give the government more power to intervene in M&A deals.

This premium content is reserved for
Law.com International Subscribers.

BENEFITS OF A SUBSCRIPTION INCLUDE:

  • Customized news by region including UK, Asia, Europe, Latin America, Middle East, Africa, and North America
  • Cutting-edge research such as UK Top 100, China 45, and Asia 50
  • Get the inside track on the biggest breaking stories that delve deep into the issues behind the headlines
  • Comprehensive coverage of the dynamic legal market from people moves to the major international jurisdictions
  • Global view into how legal tech, business of law, in-house and regulatory environments are intersecting worldwide

Already a subscriber?

James Booth

James joined Legal Week in June 2015. He reports on leading UK law firms, as well as covering the African legal market. He previously worked for legal directory Chambers & Partners as a deputy editor.

Law Firms Mentioned

<img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-68748" src="http://www.almcms.com/contrib

  • Addleshaw Goddard
  • Ashurst
  • Clifford Chance
  • DLA Piper
  • Dentons
  • Eversheds Sutherland
  • Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer
  • Irwin Mitchell
  • Linklaters

/uploads/sites/378/2017/10/sunset-Article-201710191519.jpg" alt="" width="620" height="372" /> The UK government must tread a fine line between scaring off potential investors and protecting the UK���s national security when formulating new takeover rules, according to partners. M&amp;A and infrastructure partners warn that the government faces a difficult balancing act as it formulates new the takeover rules that are intended to give the government more power to intervene in M&amp;A deals. Their warnings come after a <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-updates-mergers-regime-to-protect-national-security">government green paper</a> published earlier this month��by the Business and Energy Secretary Greg Clark set out plans to increase the governments ability to intervene in takeovers, particularly in areas that are deemed a national security risk, such as critical infrastructure, technology and defence. Addleshaw Goddard corporate partner Simon Wood, who returned to the firm from a two-year stint at the Takeover Panel earlier this month, says: ���The tightrope they are trying to walk is ensuring that Britain remains open for business but also increasing the degree of protection around national security. That includes not just the defence sector but energy, communications and utilities, which are an important fabric of the UK���s infrastructure.��� Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer infrastructure partner Richard Thexton broadly welcomes the proposals but calls for more guidance as to where the government should be notified of a deal on national security grounds, in order to avoid cases where the government intervenes in transactions at a late stage. "Under the voluntary regime, the government will have power after a non-notified deal is closed to go back and set it all aside, which from a seller���s perspective would be a disaster. Clear guidance on which deals should be notified under the voluntary regime is therefore critical,��� he says. Ashurst infrastructure partner Jason Radford meanwhile cautions that the threat of increased governmental oversight could spark a sell-off among UK infrastructure investors. ���The ramifications for the market are difficult to assess at this stage,��� he says. ���It could notionally prompt a sell-off such that owners are looking to take advantage of good market conditions before the risk of increased government oversight becomes a reality.��� The UK���s upcoming exit from the European Union further increases the importance of avoiding protectionist measures, particularly as the present government���s Brexit policy has been based around positioning the UK as what <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/liam-fox-champions-global-free-trade">International Trade Secretary Liam Fox</a> calls a ���proud champion in the cause of global free trade���. There is also increasing scepticism about the UK���s future as a recipient of foreign direct investment (FDI), with 31% of investors <a href="http://www.ey.com/uk/en/issues/business-environment/ey-uk-attractiveness-survey">responding to a 2017 EY survey</a> saying they expect the UK���s attractiveness as an FDI destination to decline, compared with just 16% in 2016. Wood says: "Being open for business worldwide post-Brexit will be very important ��� the government recognises the risk that too much interference could produce a regime that deters inward investment." Law firms have benefited from investor appetite for UK infrastructure assets in recent years, with key deals this year including <a href="http://www.legalweek.com/sites/legalweek/2017/02/08/anatomy-of-a-deal-inside-national-grids-multibillion-pound-gas-distribution-network-sale/">National Grid���s ��13.8bn sale of its gas distribution business</a> to an international consortium including Australian bank Macquarie and Qatari sovereign wealth fund the Qatar Investment Authority. Linklaters led for National Grid on the deal, while Clifford Chance and CMS advised the winning consortium. A plethora of <a href="http://www.legalweek.com/sites/legalweek/2016/12/08/linklaters-clifford-chance-and-cms-lead-as-national-grid-sells-stake-in-uk-gas-distribution-business/">other firms played roles</a> including Eversheds, Addleshaw Goddard, DLA Piper, Irwin Mitchell, Shakespeare Martineau and Dentons, underlining the importance of infrastructure deals to the legal sector. However, while there are concerns among partners that unclear rules could dampen investor appetite to make acquisitions in the UK, Thexton argues that the UK remains an appealing place for deals. He concludes: ���The UK will always be an attractive place for people to invest; it has a stable regulatory and legal environment and that won���t change as a result of these proposals, provided the government gives the necessary clear guidance. Yes, it is a hurdle to making the investment in the first place, but frankly, it���s a hurdle that well-informed buyers are already thinking about and engaging with government on, so��I don���t see why it should put people off." <

  • Addleshaw Goddard
  • Ashurst
  • Clifford Chance
  • DLA Piper
  • Dentons
  • Eversheds Sutherland
  • Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer
  • Irwin Mitchell
  • Linklaters

>

Takeovers FreezeoutsBook

An indispensable, authoritative and extremely useful work a complete guide that brings all the steps together. Joseph Flom of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher F...

Get More Information
 
 

Law.com International Newsletters & Briefings

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

Sign up for an unlimited number of complementary newsletters, alerts, and International Briefings. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 American Lawyer Media International, LLC. All Rights Reserved.