Settlements involving lawsuits over excessive compensation to non-employee directors are requiring companies to change their compensation practices.
Director compensation is under increased scrutiny by shareholders. The catalyst for these concerns stems from the notion that boards of directors improperly are setting their own pay.
The Delaware Court of Chancery approved settlement agreements in two prominent shareholder derivative actions alleging excessive director compensation: Calma v. Templeton, Del. Ch., No. 9579-CB, order and final judgment 9/9/16; and Espinoza v. Zuckerberg, Del. Ch., No. 9745-CB, order and final judgment 3/30/16. The terms of both settlements require companies to implement specific changes to their director compensation practices.
In April 2014, plaintiffs initiated a shareholder derivative action alleging that the compensation paid to eight non-employee directors of Citrix Systems Inc. was excessive. The Delaware Court of Chancery denied defendants’ motion to dismiss, which was premised on the shareholder ratification defense. Calma v. Templeton, No. 9579-CB, 2015 BL 125718 (Del. Ch. Apr. 30, 2015). The court’s decision generated significant buzz among practitioners in that mere shareholder approval of compensation plans did not amount to ratification without approval of specific action “bearing specifically on the magnitude of compensation to be paid to its non-employee directors.”
The Delaware Court of Chancery recently approved the proposed settlement agreement in Calma v. Templeton. See related story, Citrix to Cap Board Pay in Pact Approved by Del. Court. The Citrix settlement agreement contains corporate governance reforms requiring the company to implement specific changes to its current director compensation practices. Citrix is required to comply with the following provisions for a period of at least five years:
Earlier this year, the Delaware Court of Chancery approved the proposed settlement agreement in Espinoza v. Zuckerberg, a similar shareholder derivative action alleging excessive compensation to non-employee directors and officers of Facebook Inc. Espinoza v. Facebook, No. 9745-CB, 2015 BL 353714 (Del. Ch. Oct. 28, 2015).
Facebook is required to comply with the following provisions for a period of at least five years:
The recent Citrix and Facebook settlement agreements provide practitioners with additional guidance and best practices. Thus, these agreements are worth the time to review—the lessons learned by Citrix and Facebook can save companies the expense of potential litigation due to poorly drafted plans.
Stay on top of the latest industry trends and news coverage with a free trial to the Benefits Practice Resource Center.
Notify me when updates are available (No standing order will be created).
Put me on standing order
Notify me when new releases are available (no standing order will be created)