La rédaction des procès-verbaux : Considérations légales


 

Voici un article publié par Sonia K. Nijjar, Jenness E. Parker, Lauren N. Rosenello et Skadden, Arps, Slate de la firme Meagher & Flom sur le Forum du HLS, qui traite d’un sujet majeur, lequel ne fait pas souvent l’objet d’attention alors que de nombreuses questions se posent sur le sujet.

En effet, on minimise trop souvent l’importance d’un procès-verbal bien rédigé qui permet au conseil d’administration de bien jouer son rôle de représentation des intérêts des parties prenantes, dont les actionnaires.

Les règlementations en gouvernance sont plutôt discrètes sur la façon de rédiger les procès-verbaux des entreprises. La jurisprudence à cet égard est abondante dans les cas de poursuites judiciaires pour protéger les droits des actionnaires !

La rédaction des PV est une activité qui peut avoir des effets positifs ou négatifs sur un plan légal. L’article ci-dessous fait état des enjeux à cet égard.

Bonne lecture !

 

La vraie façon de rédiger un procès-verbal aujourd'hui | Secrétaire-inc

Takeaways

  • Boards should see minutes as a way to tell how they worked to fulfill their duties to stockholders, capturing a board’s deliberations and the reasoning behind its decisions.
  • Properly documenting the board’s deliberative process takes on heightened significance for “mission-critical matters” such as major deals, oversight of monoline businesses or significant revenue flows, or catastrophic events, where board actions may be the subject of stockholder litigation.
  • Well-drafted board minutes can help contain the scope of stockholders’ books and records requests and make it easier to win early dismissal of lawsuits.
  • To protect against claims that a company’s disclosures were misleading, a company’s public statements and filings should be consistent with the board minutes.

Board minutes are an essential part of a company’s internal record keeping. But they are more than a routine, formal exercise. They also play a pivotal role in stockholder litigation. As a contemporaneous record, plaintiff stockholders will scrutinize minutes when evaluating and pursuing claims against directors and officers, and judges will consider minutes at the pleadings stage. Boards should see minutes as a way to tell how they worked in fulfilling their duties to stockholders.

Minutes of important board meetings, and proxy statements describing them, have become increasingly important in recent years as a result of developments in Delaware law. Courts have sometimes granted stockholders early access to documents beyond formal board materials, such as directors’ emails and text messages, where they found that minutes offered too sparse an account of a board’s consideration of a particular issue. In addition, if a formal board record is lacking, stockholders may argue that a board breached its duty to oversee and address risk.

By contrast, a sufficiently clear record in the minutes of directors’ deliberations and the process by which they reached decisions can position the company to head off intrusive probes of internal records at the outset, help prevent complaints from being filed, and potentially aid in winning early dismissal of suits.

 

Logistical Drafting Considerations

There is no one-size-fits-all approach to drafting board minutes, but they typically reflect, among other things, formal matters such as the date that the board meeting was noticed or, alternatively, if notice was waived by all directors; who attended the meeting (including executives, employees and any outside advisers) and how they participated (in person or remotely); as well as when the meeting commenced and adjourned. If the board received presentations, those may also be attached as exhibits.

In some instances, where individual directors make comments or raise questions, good practice is to identify the issues considered, inputs the board received and other details about the discussion generally without a need to detail specific questions or name individual directors.

Potential Stockholder Challenges

When drafting board minutes, keep in mind that there can be several types of stockholder challenges to board action or inaction of a Delaware public company. The board should expect such challenges, whether in the form of a books and records demand, derivative or direct litigation, or demands that the company pursue litigation. Here are the most common issues raised by stockholders, and how good minutes can be helpful in defending against legal challenges:

Delegation to a committee. If a board determines that a committee would be helpful to oversee an investigation or transaction, whether to avoid a potential conflict or allow for more agility and speed with a smaller group, it is best to document the decision with board resolutions. The minutes may (i) explain why the board concluded it was in the company’s best interest to enlist a committee and (ii) specify the committee’s mandate and scope of authority. For example, it may be helpful to explain whether the committee has full authority (like a special committee weighing a transaction where there is a potential conflict of interest for other board members), or whether the committee will make a recommendation for full board approval.

Oversight. When the board is deliberating about significant issues, including those that Delaware courts have deemed “mission-critical,” the board’s process and actions should be adequately captured to reflect its oversight. This may include documenting how it received and considered the input of management and advisers, as well as a discussion of a board’s consideration and decision regarding risks and mitigation of those.

Director independence and conflicts. Directors and officers may complete questionnaires on a regular basis as well as in a specific context, like a transaction, to evaluate their independence and to identify potential conflicts of interest. Certain disclosures, particularly ones that might pose a potential conflict, may warrant board-level consideration. The minutes should reflect this deliberation and subsequent determinations.

Good, thorough minutes are even more important today than in the past because of the proliferation of stockholder books and records requests.

Other conflicts. Where there is a potential conflict regarding any matter, the board should weigh whether that should be disclosed and document that consideration in the minutes. For example, stockholders commonly challenge a board’s choice of advisers — particularly financial firms assisting on transactions. A board may require disclosure of potential adviser conflicts, and consider those before retaining an adviser. It may also insist on updates if any additional material conflicts arise. It is important that the minutes clearly document this process and any conflict considerations. Not all conflicts are fatal, particularly if understood and appropriately considered and addressed (if appropriate), but failing to identify and consider conflicts can be problematic.

Deal processes. Just as it is important to document the board’s deliberation regarding significant issues, it is critical to make a record of the board’s process when selling the company. Boards should receive regular updates about the sale process, including any important communications (or lack thereof) with bidders. For a significant M&A transaction, the record should reflect a thorough, board-centric process, even if — as is generally perfectly appropriate and typical — the CEO is leading negotiations.

It is common to use code names when discussing M&A deal counterparties even in the official record, as other parties may end up seeing the board’s minutes.

Disclosure claims. The company’s public statements and publicly filed documents should reflect what actually happened at the board. Accordingly, when preparing public filings, care should be given to reviewing board materials and minutes. If there are discrepancies, stockholders may allege that the company’s disclosures were incomplete or misleading.

Potential disclosure violations take on heightened significance in the deal context. If a stockholder successfully alleges a disclosure deficiency, directors may not benefit from the protections of two important Delaware decisions, Corwin and MFW. Under Corwin, a transaction approved by fully informed, uncoerced stockholders, not involving a controlling stockholder, is protected by the business judgment rule, which shields directors from liability if they acted in good faith and followed proper procedures.

MFW and later cases that follow also apply the business judgment rule to controlling-stockholder “squeeze out” mergers if certain conditions are satisfied. One condition is that there was a fully informed vote of minority stockholders. Accordingly, when drafting the disclosure document, the board minutes should be used as a guide so that the documents track each other and accurately reflect the board’s deliberations and actions so the board may receive the benefits of Corwin and MFW in any litigation down the road.

Protecting Privilege

It is important to ensure that the fact that legal advice was given to the board is reflected in the minutes at least at a high level, but boards need to guard against waiving the attorney-client privilege. Although privileged information is typically redacted when minutes are produced to plaintiff stockholders, legal advice may at some point become an issue in litigation if the board asserts that it relied on that advice.

To protect privileged information from disclosure, minutes reflecting legal advice should be characterized as an outside attorney or in-house counsel “providing legal advice” about a matter as opposed to “advising the board” to take a certain action, because advice from a lawyer that is not legal in substance — say, advice on business strategy — potentially may not be protected by the privilege. See our April 13, 2021, Informed Board article “Just Between You and Us: The 10 Most Common Client Misconceptions About the Attorney-Client Privilege.”

The Increase in Books and Records Demands Makes Board Minutes All the More Important

Good, thorough minutes are even more important today than in the past because of the proliferation of stockholder books and records requests. Several developments in Delaware law have given stockholders and their counsel strong incentives to make those demands before taking other legal steps. As a result, many Delaware companies find themselves deluged with those requests, which can furnish stockholders with ammunition for litigation. See our June 1, 2022, Informed Board article, “In the Name of the Company: When Stockholders Interfere in the Boardroom.”

By observing careful practices regarding minutes, companies can make it more likely that the courts will not allow access to books and records beyond formal documents such as minutes, thereby limiting the material that can be used in complaints. Moreover, at the pleadings stage, companies may point the court to portions of minutes to rebut the inference given to plaintiffs’ allegations, or to demonstrate “cherry picking” or inaccuracies in the plaintiffs’ characterizations that create a false picture of the board’s process.

In sum, prepared carefully, minutes tell the board’s side of the story to stockholders and courts.

Auteur : Gouvernance des entreprises | Jacques Grisé

Ce blogue fait l’inventaire des documents les plus pertinents et récents en gouvernance des entreprises. La sélection des billets, « posts », est le résultat d’une veille assidue des articles de revue, des blogues et sites web dans le domaine de la gouvernance, des publications scientifiques et professionnelles, des études et autres rapports portant sur la gouvernance des sociétés, au Canada et dans d’autres pays, notamment aux États-Unis, au Royaume-Uni, en France, en Europe, et en Australie. Chaque jour, je fais un choix parmi l’ensemble des publications récentes et pertinentes et je commente brièvement la publication. L’objectif de ce blogue est d’être la référence en matière de documentation en gouvernance dans le monde francophone, en fournissant au lecteur une mine de renseignements récents (les billets quotidiens) ainsi qu’un outil de recherche simple et facile à utiliser pour répertorier les publications en fonction des catégories les plus pertinentes. Jacques Grisé est professeur titulaire retraité (associé) du département de management de la Faculté des sciences de l’administration de l’Université Laval. Il est détenteur d’un Ph.D. de la Ivy Business School (University of Western Ontario), d’une Licence spécialisée en administration des entreprises (Université de Louvain en Belgique) et d’un B.Sc.Comm. (HEC, Montréal). En 1993, il a effectué des études post-doctorales à l’University of South Carolina, Columbia, S.C. dans le cadre du Faculty Development in International Business Program. Il a été directeur des programmes de formation en gouvernance du Collège des administrateurs de sociétés (CAS) de 2006 à 2012. Il est maintenant collaborateur spécial au CAS. Il a été président de l’ordre des administrateurs agréés du Québec de 2015 à 2017. Jacques Grisé a été activement impliqué dans diverses organisations et a été membre de plusieurs comités et conseils d'administration reliés à ses fonctions : Professeur de management de l'Université Laval (depuis 1968), Directeur du département de management (13 ans), Directeur d'ensemble des programmes de premier cycle en administration (6 ans), Maire de la Municipalité de Ste-Pétronille, I.O. (1993-2009), Préfet adjoint de la MRC l’Île d’Orléans (1996-2009). Il est présentement impliqué dans les organismes suivants : membre de l'Ordre des administrateurs agréés du Québec (OAAQ), membre du Comité des Prix et Distinctions de l'Université Laval. Il préside les organisations suivantes : Société Musique de chambre à Ste-Pétronille Inc. (depuis 1989), Groupe Sommet Inc. (depuis 1986), Coopérative de solidarité de Services à domicile Orléans (depuis 2019) Jacques Grisé possède également une expérience de 3 ans en gestion internationale, ayant agi comme directeur de projet en Algérie et aux Philippines de 1977-1980 (dans le cadre d'un congé sans solde de l'Université Laval). Il est le Lauréat 2007 du Prix Mérite du Conseil interprofessionnel du Québec (CIQ) et Fellow Adm.A. En 2012, il reçoit la distinction Hommage aux Bâtisseurs du CAS. En 2019, il reçoit la médaille de l’assemblée nationale. Spécialités : Le professeur Grisé est l'auteur d’une soixantaine d’articles à caractère scientifique ou professionnel. Ses intérêts de recherche touchent principalement la gouvernance des sociétés, les comportements dans les organisations, la gestion des ressources humaines, les stratégies de changement organisationnel, le processus de consultation, le design organisationnel, la gestion de programmes de formation, notamment ceux destinés à des hauts dirigeants et à des membres de conseil d'administration.

Qu'en pensez-vous ?

Entrer les renseignements ci-dessous ou cliquer sur une icône pour ouvrir une session :

Logo WordPress.com

Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte WordPress.com. Déconnexion /  Changer )

Image Twitter

Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte Twitter. Déconnexion /  Changer )

Photo Facebook

Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte Facebook. Déconnexion /  Changer )

Connexion à %s

Ce site utilise Akismet pour réduire les indésirables. En savoir plus sur la façon dont les données de vos commentaires sont traitées.

%d blogueueurs aiment cette page :