Delaware Legislation Banning Fee-Shifting in Bylaws and Charters


In a swift response to the Delaware Supreme Court’s May 8 opinion holding that fee-shifting bylaws are facially valid (ATP Tour v. Deutscher Tennis Bund), members of the Delaware bar, representing both plaintiffs and corporations, proposed legislation that would effectively overturn the application of the decision to stock corporations. The policy concerns are that fee-shifting provisions would undermine the limited liability associated with an investment in stock, and “loser-pays” clauses could result in a significant decrease in the number of meritorious (as well as frivolous) cases filed in Delaware, thereby negatively affecting Delaware’s preeminence in the field of corporate law. Notably, the amendments are not limited to fee-shifting provisions. Rather, they generally bar clauses in bylaws and certificates of incorporation imposing liability on stockholders.On May 29, the Corporation Law Section of the Delaware State Bar Association approved the amendments, which have a proposed effective date of August 1. If subsequently approved by the Executive Committee of the Bar Association, the amendments will go to the state legislature. The legislature customarily follows the recommendations of the Bar Association and enactment is widely expected. 

While fee-shifting in organizational documents would be barred by the amendments, ATP Tour nonetheless represents an effective endorsement by the Delaware Supreme Court of the Delaware Chancery Court’s opinion in Boilermakers, upholding the validity of board-adopted exclusive forum bylaws. Exclusive forum bylaws and charter provisions, which require that stockholder class actions and other intra-corporate claims be brought exclusively in specified forums (typically Delaware courts for Delaware corporations), also target the phenomenon of frivolous litigation, but without the specter of additional liability. While the adoption and enforcement of board-adopted forum bylaws are subject to situational challenge, such provisions have increasingly been enforced by courts in other states, including California, Illinois, Louisiana, New York and Texas.  

Read more.


Written by:

Published In:

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »

All the intelligence you need, in one easy email:

Great! Your first step to building an email digest of JD Supra authors and topics. Log in with LinkedIn so we can start sending your digest...

Sign up for your custom alerts now, using LinkedIn ›

* With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name.