Insight

Cross-Border Listings of Swiss Companies

The law of unintended consequences.

Cross-Border Listings
JH

Jacques Iffland and Ariel Ben Hattar

September 1, 2017 12:49 AM

Cross-border listings are in fashion in Switzerland. Swiss Exchange (SIX) has long been trying to lure foreign issuers into listing their shares on its markets. The success has been limited so far, since only 13 non-Swiss issuers currently have a main listing on SIX. Indeed, the trend seems to go in the other direction. Out of a total of 17 IPOs of Swiss issuers between 2014 and the end of June 2017, six—or around 35 percent—were carried out outside of Switzerland.

The main reason for this state of affairs seems to be the (at least perceived) higher liquidity of foreign markets, especially for smaller market capitalizations. Some issuers hope that tapping the U.S. or European markets will give them access to deeper pools of liquidity.

From a legal perspective, however, cross-border listings have far-reaching implications. One of the most significant ones is that they often leave the relevant issuers ill-prepared and vulnerable to unsolicited takeover approaches. The Swiss takeover rules only apply to issuers that have equity securities listed on a Swiss stock exchange. As a result, the key mechanism through which Swiss law protects minorities in the event of a change of control—the mandatory offer regime that obliges any person who acquires more than one-third of the voting rights of a Swiss company to make a tender offer for all the listed shares of the company—does not apply to issuers whose shares are not listed in Switzerland.

In some jurisdictions, and most notably in the U.S., takeovers and protection of minorities are matters governed by company (state) law and not by securities law. Thus, in the event of a fight for the control of a Swiss issuer listed exclusively in the U.S., the expectation there will be that Swiss law makes it possible for the target to take defensive measures by implementing some sort of “poison pill.”

However, this is not the case. Swiss law considers that minority protection in the event of a change of control is a matter of securities law, not of company law. Also, because the Swiss securities laws (normally) protect minorities in the event of a change of control through the mandatory offer regime, defensive tactics are generally deemed unnecessary and consequently problematic in Switzerland. In particular, the legal consensus is that Swiss corporate law does not allow the board to dilute a dissident shareholder by excluding it from a rights issue (which would be the typical mechanism of a U.S.-style poison pill). Unless the Swiss target opts for a (costly) new additional listing in Switzerland, its board may consequently find itself defenseless in the event of an unsolicited bid. This may not only affect the board’s ability to defeat the hostile approach, but also to negotiate a friendly transaction.

The issue is not only theoretical. The independent directors of Alcon, the Swiss eye care specialist (then listed on the NYSE), discovered the issue the hard way in 2010. After having acquired a majority stake in the company from Nestlé, Novartis attempted to force a buy-out merger on the company. Since it was not bound by the Swiss takeover rules, the deal proposed by Novartis valued the Alcon shares well below the then prevailing market price (and below what had been paid to Nestlé), which would not have been possible had the Swiss takeover regime applied. Novartis’ merger proposal met stiff resistance from minority shareholders and Alcon’s independent directors. A class action was filed in New York against Novartis and Alcon, but was eventually dismissed for lack of jurisdiction in the U.S. courts. The matter was eventually settled amiably, after Novartis agreed to sweeten the terms of the merger. It exposed, however, the dire consequences of the legal vacuum that resulted from Alcon’s cross-border listing.

Seven years later, the issue raised by outbound cross-border listings is still unresolved. The risk that this type of transaction represents for a company and its shareholders may seem remote at the time of listing, when a majority of the shares are generally in firm hands. The consequences of the risk materializing can however hardly be ignored, as what initially seemed like an attractive choice and a way to secure the future of the company may in retrospect turn out to have been a leap in the dark.

Trending Articles

The 2024 Best Lawyers in Spain™


by Best Lawyers

Best Lawyers is honored to announce the 16th edition of The Best Lawyers in Spain™ and the third edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in Spain™ for 2024.

Tall buildings and rushing traffic against clouds and sun in sky

Best Lawyers Expands Chilean 2024 Awards


by Best Lawyers

Best Lawyers is pleased to announce the 14th edition of The Best Lawyers in Chile™ and the inaugural edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in Chile™, honoring the top lawyers and firms conferred on by their Chilean peers.

Landscape of city in Chile

Announcing the 2023 The Best Lawyers in America Honorees


by Best Lawyers

Only the top 5.3% of all practicing lawyers in the U.S. were selected by their peers for inclusion in the 29th edition of The Best Lawyers in America®.

Gold strings and dots connecting to form US map

The Best Lawyers in Spain™ 2023


by Best Lawyers

Announcing Spain's recognized lawyers for 2023.

Flag of Spain

Announcing The Best Lawyers in South Africa™ 2024


by Best Lawyers

Best Lawyers is excited to announce the landmark 15th edition of The Best Lawyers in South Africa™ for 2024, including the exclusive "Law Firm of the Year" awards.

Sky view of South Africa town and waterways

The Best Lawyers in Portugal™ 2024


by Best Lawyers

The 2024 awards for Portugal include the 14th edition of The Best Lawyers in Portugal™ and 2nd edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in Portugal™.

City and beach with green water and blue sky

The Best Lawyers in South Africa™ 2023


by Best Lawyers

Best Lawyers proudly announces lawyers recognized in South Africa for 2023.

South African flag

The Best Lawyers in Peru™ 2024


by Best Lawyers

Best Lawyers is excited to announce the landmark 10th edition of The Best Lawyers in Peru, the prestigious award recognizing the country's lop legal talent.

Landscape of Peru city with cliffside and ocean

The Best Lawyers in Chile™ 2023


by Best Lawyers

The results include an elite field of top lawyers and firms in Chile.

White star in blue box beside white box with red box on bottom

The Best Lawyers in Colombia™ 2024


by Best Lawyers

Best Lawyers is honored to announce the 14th edition of The Best Lawyers in Colombia™ for 2024, which honors Colombia's most esteemed lawyers and law firms.

Cityscape of Colombia with blue cloudy sky above

Announcing the 2024 Best Lawyers in Puerto Rico™


by Best Lawyers

Best Lawyers is proud to announce the 11th edition of The Best Lawyers in Puerto Rico™, honoring the top lawyers and firms across the country for 2024.

View of Puerto Rico city from the ocean

Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America for 2023


by Best Lawyers

The third edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America™ highlights the legal talent of lawyers who have been in practice less than 10 years.

Three arrows made of lines and dots on blue background

The 2023 Best Lawyers in Portugal™


by Best Lawyers

Announcing the elite group of lawyers recognized in Portugal for 2023.

Green and red Portuguese flag

2021 Best Lawyers: The Global Issue


by Best Lawyers

The 2021 Global Issue features top legal talent from the most recent editions of Best Lawyers and Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch worldwide.

2021 Best Lawyers: The Global Issue

Unwrapping Shrinkflation


by Justin Smulison

Through the lens of the United States, we take a closer look at the global implication of companies downsizing products while maintaining and often raising prices.

Chocolate bar being unwrapped from foil

What the Courts Say About Recording in the Classroom


by Christina Henagen Peer and Peter Zawadski

Students and parents are increasingly asking to use audio devices to record what's being said in the classroom. But is it legal? A recent ruling offer gives the answer to a question confusing parents and administrators alike.

Is It Legal for Students to Record Teachers?