The court
found that the specific reference to “private” at the start of the clause
qualified the entire list that followed, indicating that the parties intended
to restrict the engagement to private financings. The court concluded that if
the intention had been to include both private and public financings, broader
language would have been used, such as “any sale of
equity instruments”.
Судебная практика
www.jdsupra.com
- Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
- Antitrust & Trade Regulation
- Arbitration Agreements
- Bankruptcy
- Bitcoin
- Blockchain
- Breach of Contract
- Business Organizations
- Business Torts
- Civil Remedies
- Civil Rights
- Confidentiality Agreements
- Constitutional Law
- Construction
- Construction Contracts
- Consumer Protection
- Contract Disputes
- Electronic Discovery
- Energy & Utilities
- Environmental Issues
- Franchise
- General Business
- Government Contracting
- Health
- Intellectual Property
- International Trade
- Labor & Employment
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- Non-Compete Agreements
- Products Liability
- Professional Malpractice
- Professional Practice
- Ransomware
- Real Estate - Commercial
- Science, Computers, & Technology
- Shareholders
- Taxes
- Transportation
- Virtual Currency