AZB & Partners recent lateral partner Nisha Kaur Uberoi has on 8 August obtained phase 1 merger clearance from the Competition Commission of India (CCI) for Ultratech Cement’s Rs 16,189 crore ($2.4bn) acquisition of the cement assets of the Jaypee Group.
The filing was made on 29 April 2016, according to the firm’s release, when Uberoi was still competition partner at Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas (CAM).
However, Uberoi formally joined AZB on 3 August and the competition part of the Ultratech deal moved with her.
As did AZB senior associate Soumya Hariharan and associate Atreyee Sarkar, who had also joined Uberoi from CAM and assisted on the competition aspects of the deal, according to an AZB press release.
It is understood that Cyril Amarchand partner Tushar Mavani led the corporate aspects of the transaction.
Vaish Associates partner Bomi Daruwala acted for Jaypee on the corporate aspects of the transaction.
The cement sector has seen a huge amount of attention from competition regulators in recent years, with Uberoi and CAM having acted for 11 cement companies late 2015 to overturn the CCI’s Rs 6,300 crore penalty before the Competition Appellate Tribunal (Compat) with senior counsel Gopal Subramanium.
Clarification: CAM was not instructed by 11 cement companies, but was already acted for the Ambujas and Lafarge in the appeal, when Compat expressed a preference for parties to not repeat arguments. The other cement companies then adopted CAM and Subramanium’s arguments.
In December 2014, the Aditya Birla Group’s cement firm Ultratech had bought Rs 5,400 crore of assets from Jaiprakash Associates, on which what-was-then Amarchand Mangaldas advised, with managing partner Cyril Shroff, corporate partner Tushar Mavani and competition partner Uberoi.
The same team acted for Ultratech in its acquisition of Jaypee Cement Corporation’s Gujarat unit for Rs 3,800 crore in 2013.
Aditya Birla is a long-standing client of Shroff’s, with the firm having acted on its cement-related deals going back at least to 2009.
Photo by William Warby
Comments
Talent has moved to azb? Is it?
You must be kidding!
Clearly a publicity stunt by CAM s BD team.
Pls resume sangeet practice again?
Also, CAM acted for Ambuja and later came on record for Lafarge, after major arguments were over.
My understanding is that Compat's Singhvi indicated that he didn't want repetition of arguments from all 11 companies, so since CAM was on for Ambujas and Lafarge already (with Gopal S), nearly all the other cement companies essentially agreed to let CAM and Gopal lead arguments and just accepted the lead company's arguments, without advancing any additional arguments. Would have to read the full order to be sure though.
So yes, no vakalat was filed by 11 for CAM, but practically, CAM and Gopal Subramanium argued for the others.
or is this jealous SAM again (?)
http://www.legallyindia.com/competition-law/cam-gopal-subramanium-win-compat-stay-of-record-rs-6-300-cr-cement-penalty-because-cci-chairman-wasn-t-present-for-hearings
If I recall correctly, their interests in the appeal were aligned, since they all challenged CCI decision on natural justice grounds, so it made sense for them all to advance arguments together...
Slow Clap. #Respect
http://www.legallyindia.com/corporate-/-ma/max-hdfc-insurance-mega-merger-sees-cyril-shardul-azb-jointly-advise
[...]
Kian pls dont censor this? -_-
Update 1- CAM is still struggling hard to find her replacement.
Very big loss for CAM.
Also a case officer once told me that she really can strike a balance between what her clients need her to do and what CCI mandates.
She was against us in one of the matters where we represented the informant. So much to learn from her
In terms of quality, you get the same quality merger advice from SAM, AZB, and Dhall. Quite frankly, it isn't rocket science, and the better competition lawyers do more of the enforcement side work. A good managing associate/associate partner can execute merger control filings and advisory with sufficient proficiency.
On the enforcement side, Samir Gandhi, Pallavi Shroff, and half the other SAM partners are ahead of Nisha.
Yup you missed out lawyers,, the details,,, the money etc..
http://www.livemint.com/Money/SluQKkCWf67DtAkg2HiApJ/HDFC-LifeMax-Life-deal-Positive-but-for-the-noncompete-fe.html
http://www.legallyindia.com/corporate-/-ma/max-hdfc-insurance-mega-merger-sees-cyril-shardul-azb-jointly-advise
Am still not 100% happy with valuation though.
For the purposes of general business reporting, market impact, etc, fine. But for law firm league tables, I'm not so sure.
Let's say company A (worth $10bn) and company B (worth $7bn) do a deal.
In Deal X, A buys B for $7bn.
In Deal Y, A and B merge in some complex share swap deal, etc, and are jointly worth $17bn.
So is it fair for deal structure Y, to be 'worth' nearly twice as much as X, for the purpose of a law firm M&A league table?
How many articles relating to Nisha's move?!?!?
Kian dancing to her tune!!