In its decision re: AFSCME's bylaw, the Delaware Supreme Court had some interesting, and perhaps for shareholder advocates, encouraging words about shareholders' right to participte in the board nomination process.
Thus, the Court stated:
The Bylaw would encourage the nomination of non-management board candidates by promising reimbursement of the nominating stockholders’ proxy expenses if one or more of its candidates are elected. In that the shareholders also have a legitimate interest, because the Bylaw would facilitate the exercise of their right to participate in selecting contestants. The Court of Chancery [in Harrah’s Entm’t v. JCC Holding Co.] has so recognized:
[T]he unadorned right to cast a ballot in a contest for [corporate] office. . .is meaningless without the right to participate in selecting the contestants. As the nominating process circumscribes the range of choices to be made, it is a fundamental and outcome-determinative step in the election of officeholders. To allow for voting while maintaining a closed selection process thus renders the former a meaningless exercise.
The shareholders of a Delaware corporation have the right “to participate in selecting the contestants” for election to the board. The shareholders are entitled to facilitate the exercise of that right by proposing a bylaw that would encourage candidates other than board-sponsored nominees to stand for election. The Bylaw would accomplish that by committing the corporation to reimburse the election expenses of shareholders whose candidates are successfully elected.”
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8345157d569e200e553a8b55c8833
Links to weblogs that reference Some Interesting Words for Proxy Access:

Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
