Court Of Chancery Re-affirms Board's Use Of Poison Pill To Block Inadequate Tender Offer
The Court of Chancery denied an application by Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. to force the board of Airgas, Inc. to redeem its poison pill so as to allow the stockholders of Airgas to decide whether to tender into Air Products' all-cash, all-shares offer. The Court in this 153-page opinion carefully applies Delaware Supreme Court precedent in holding that the Airgas board reasonably believed that the Air Products offer was inadequate and that its decision to maintain its pill was a reasonable response to that threat. A major factor in upholding the reasonableness of the Airgas board's actions was that three directors nominated by Air Products supported the decision to maintain the pill. While some have questioned the continued vitality of doctrine that allows the board to maintain a poison pill in the circumstance of an all-cash, all-shares and fully financed offer, this decision re-affirms Delaware's director-centric approach to corporate governance. The description in the opinion of the process followed by the Airgas board serves as a primer for how a board might defend against a tender offer it believes is inadequate.
