The transaction will not
increase the percentage of voting rights that Pedro holds in
Trojan Limited. Both before and after the transaction, Pedro will
hold no voting rights in that Code company.
However, assuming that Victoria’s 40% holding in listed company
Nautilus Limited gives Victoria effective control of that company,
then, in turn, Victoria will have effective control over Nautilus’s
25% holding in Code company Trojan Limited. The proposed
transaction will enable Pedro to accede to that control position.
Accordingly, as the proposed transaction will increase from 0%
to 25%, the percentage of voting rights in Trojan Limited that is
controlled by Pedro, Pedro will contravene rule 6(1)(a) in
relation to Trojan Limited.
Note that it is not sufficient for compliance with the Code that
the shareholders of Nautilus Limited approved Pedro’s
acquisition of Victoria’s shares in Nautilus Limited. The
acquisition of control of voting rights in Trojan Limited is one for
the shareholders of Trojan Limited to approve.
The Code is concerned with regulating changes of control of
Code companies. The Code would be ineffectual if it
concentrated only on voting rights held or controlled by a
particular company or individual. It was essential to include in
the Code the concept of “association” so that when two or more
associated parties acquire ownership of, or control of, voting
rights above 20% in a Code company the fundamental rule is
triggered.
The concept of associates appears in fundamental rule 6(1)(a) as
well as in two of the deeming provisions in rule 6(2). In all three
instances, the concept serves as an anti-avoidance measure.
Example 4. Associates Pedro and Quentin hold respectively 8%
and 10% of the shares in Code company Trojan Limited. Pedro
proposes to increase his holding by 7% to 15% through onmarket
purchases.
Pedro’s purchase will not make him the holder or controller of more than 20% in Trojan Limited.