M&A - Japan Compliance

Japan Compliance

M&A

A collection of 10 posts

Tokyo High Court 2022: attorney-director liable for failed M&A; heightened duty of care, inadequate due diligence; comparative negligence rejected

Corporate Governance

Director Liability in Japan: A Case Study Involving Attorney Directors and M&A

TL;DR • Tokyo High Court (Sept 15 2022) held an attorney-director personally liable for losses from a failed acquisition because of a heightened duty of care and deficient due-diligence. • The ruling clarifies that specialist directors cannot rely on the Business-Judgment defence when their expert advice misleads the board. • Comparative-negligence arguments

Slide contrasting US vs. Japan poison pill models, showing bid premium uplift, entrenchment risk, and governance safeguards.

Corporate Governance

Hostile Takeovers and Defense Measures in Japan: Empirical Insights and Strategic Considerations

TL;DR * Hostile takeovers are still rare in Japan, yet debate over takeover defenses remains intense. * Empirical research—mainly US but informative for Japan—shows defenses can raise bid premiums but also risk entrenching management and lowering long-term value. * Tokyo practice differs: pills are often designed to block, not just

Slide summarising Japan’s M&A legal framework, FEFTA screening triggers, JFTC merger-control steps, and key deal stages for U.S. acquirers

Japan M&A Guide 2025: Legal Essentials & Practical Tips for U.S. Companies

TL;DR This 2025 guide walks U.S. companies through Japan-specific M&A structures, FEFTA foreign-investment screening, JFTC merger control, labor-transfer rules and post-merger integration pitfalls—offering practical checkpoints for deal certainty and value creation. Table of Contents * I. The Legal Framework for M&A in Japan * A.

Slide showing Japan-M&A timeline: strategic fit, due diligence, AMA & FEFTA filings, labor transfer steps, and post-merger integration milestones.

Navigating M&A in Japan: Key Legal Considerations for US Companies

TL;DR US acquirers must bridge Japan-specific information gaps, clear Antimonopoly Act and FEFTA screenings, respect labor-transfer rules, and plan culture-sensitive post-merger integration. Early, integrated advisor teams and post-closing due diligence are critical to capture value and avoid regulatory or compliance surprises. Table of Contents 1. Preparation and Strategic Alignment

Slide summarising METI’s 2023 acquisition guidelines: three core principles, board duties, special-committee process and stringent conditions for defensive measures.

Corporate Governance

New Landscape for Corporate Acquisitions in Japan: Understanding the "Guidelines for Corporate Acquisitions"

TL;DR * METI’s August 2023 “Guidelines for Corporate Acquisitions” establish three core principles—corporate value focus, shareholder intent and transparency—shifting boards from defensive reflexes to value-justified decision-making. * Target boards must report bids promptly, weigh them sincerely, manage conflicts through independent committees and disclose reasoning; bidders must engage in

Slide showing investor impacts of Japan’s 2023 takeover guidelines: MoM vote power, board-process checklist, activist negotiation expectations and engagement roadmap.

Corporate Governance

Investor View: Japan’s 2023 Takeover Guidelines and the New Activism Playbook

TL;DR * METI’s 2023 takeover guidelines boost investor leverage by demanding transparent board processes and majority-of-the-minority (MoM) approval for key defences. * Institutional investors gain clearer benchmarks for stewardship engagement, while activists can challenge weak boards but must show good-faith negotiations. * Shareholder votes on defences will hinge on independent investors,

Slide showing METI 2023 takeover-guideline roadmap: board North-Star principle, independent committee role, MoM vote for defenses and business-judgment implications.

Corporate Governance

Navigating the Deal: Board Duties Under Japan’s 2023 METI Takeover Guidelines

TL;DR * METI’s 2023 takeover guidelines raise board-conduct standards: directors must centre every decision on corporate value and shareholder common interests. * Independent-director special committees, full information-gathering and fair disclosure to shareholders are now baseline expectations. * Defensive measures require concrete harm, proportionality and (ideally) a post-bid majority-of-the-minority vote, or directors

Slide summarising METI’s 2023 takeover-defence guidelines: harm-based justification, MoM vote requirement, independent committee process and decline of pre-adopted poison pills.

Rethinking Defensive Measures: Hostile Takeovers Under Japan’s 2023 METI Guidelines

TL;DR * METI’s August-2023 takeover guidelines pivot Japan away from pre-adopted poison pills toward case-specific, shareholder-centric defences. * Boards may oppose bids only when concrete harm to corporate value or shareholder common interests is shown and less-intrusive options won’t suffice. * Any dilution‐type defence should be approved post-bid by

Slide outlining METI’s 2023 Takeover Guidelines: core principles, board duties, bidder expectations and shareholder-approval model for defensive measures.

Corporate Governance

Japan’s New M&A Playbook: How METI’s 2023 Takeover Guidelines Reshape Deals and Defences

TL;DR * METI’s August 2023 “Guidelines for Corporate Takeovers” introduce soft-law principles that prioritise corporate value and shareholder common interests. * Boards must evaluate hostile bids seriously, disclose rationale, control conflicts via independent committees and seek shareholder approval before deploying defences. * Bidders must engage transparently and avoid coercive structures; courts

One-slide summary: JFTC merger control—thresholds, theories of harm, remedies, monitoring trustees

Competition / Antitrust Law

Antitrust Oversight in Japanese M&A: Understanding Merger Control and the Role of Monitoring Trustees

TL;DR: Japan’s Antimonopoly Act requires pre-merger filings when thresholds are met, and the JFTC rigorously analyses unilateral and coordinated effects. Where concerns arise, structural or behavioural remedies—often overseen by monitoring trustees—enable clearance. Early antitrust assessment and local expertise are critical for deal certainty. Table of Contents