The browser you are currently using is not being supported by this website, please upgrade to a more recent browser for a better viewing experience.
23 August 2001
On Tuesday 31 July 2001 Montana Group (N.Z.) Limited sought an exemption to delay the release of its target company statement until Wednesday 8 August.
Montana sought the exemption because of a decision by the Market Surveillance Panel of the New Zealand Stock Exchange on 31 July 2001. That decision related to the timing of the sell-down of securities by Lion Nathan Limited. The Panel was advised that the Market Surveillance Panel's decision was communicated to Montana after 5.00 p.m. on Tuesday 31 July 2001 and that by that time Montana's target company statement had been finalised for printing and distribution to shareholders. The decision meant that significant changes had to be made to the target company statement before it could be sent to shareholders.
Montana submitted that it had insufficient time to make these changes and send the statement to its shareholders by 3 August 2001, the last date available to Montana for the statement to be distributed if it was to comply with the Rule 46 of the Takeovers Code.
The Panel declined Montana's request for an exemption on 2 August 2001. In declining the request the Panel noted that:
Montana failed to despatch the target company statement by Friday 3 August 2001 and, in doing so, breached Rule 46 of the Takeovers Code. The target company statement was not sent to the required parties until Monday 6 August 2001.
Mr David Jones, Deputy Chairperson of the Panel, said "The Panel takes any breach of Rule 46 of the Code very seriously. The requirement for target companies to send their statements to their shareholders within the time periods set down in the Code is very important. It is intended to ensure the target company shareholders are given timely advice from the directors of their company concerning the offer before them. The Panel will not grant exemptions from the timing requirements of the Code readily."
The Takeovers Act 1993 provides for a number of possible remedies where a party is held to have breached the Code or the Act, including applying to the Court for the imposition of pecuniary penalties. In this instance, although Montana acknowledges that it acted in breach of the Code, the Panel has decided that it would take no further action.
In making this decision the Panel took into account: