Irish Competition Authority Decisions
You are here:
BAILII >>
Databases >>
Irish Competition Authority Decisions >>
AIB Investment Manager Ltd/Prince of Wales Hotel Ltd [1995] IECA 396 (25th April, 1995)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IECompA/1995/396.html
Cite as:
[1995] IECA 396
[
New search]
[
Printable RTF version]
[
Help]
AIB Investment Manager Ltd/Prince of Wales Hotel Ltd [1995] IECA 396 (25th April, 1995)
COMPETITION
AUTHORITY
Competition
Authority Decision No.396 of 25 April 1995 relating to a proceeding under
Section 4
of
the Competition Act, 1991
Notification
No. CA/431/92E - Prince of Wales Hotel Ltd/Share Subscription and Shareholders
Agreement 1991
Decision
No.396
Price: £0.80
£1.30
incl. postage
Notification
No. CA/431/92E - Prince of Wales Hotel Ltd/Share Subscription and Shareholders
Agreement 1991
Decision
No.396
Introduction
1. Notification
was made by AIB Investment Managers Ltd (AIBIM) on 30 September 1992 with a
request for a certificate under
Section 4(4) of the
Competition Act or, in the
event of a refusal by the Competition Authority to issue a certificate, a
licence under
Section 4(2) in respect of a Share Subscription and Shareholders
Agreement relating to shares in the Prince of Wales Hotel Ltd. Notice of
intention to issue a certificate was published in the Irish Times on 9
December 1994.
(a) The
Subject of the Notification
2. The
notification concerns a share subscription and shareholders agreement between
John O'Gorman, O'Gorman Group (Athlone) Ltd, Dr. Ribeiro, Zanatti Investments
Ltd, as covenantors, Business and Trading House Investment Company Ltd (BTHIC),
AIB Investment Managers Ltd (AIBIM), Erin Executor & Trustee Co Ltd and
Prince of Wales Hotel Ltd in relation to the subscription by two designated
investment funds, one managed by AIBIM and the other managed by BTHIC, for new
shares in Prince of Wales Hotel Ltd.
(b) The
Parties Involved
3. The
parties to the agreement are as follows:
The
Investee Company
(i) Prince
of Wales Hotel Ltd operates a 72 room 3 Star hotel at Athlone, Co.
Westmeath. The holders of ordinary shares of £1 each in the company before
and after the agreement were as follows:-
Before
After
O'Gorman
Group (Athlone) Ltd
56,625
56,625
Zanatti
Investments Ltd
28,875
28,875
Tourism/Business
Exp. Fund
30,000
30,000
AIBIM
Fund
- 45,455
BTH
Fund
- 7,954
Total
issued capital
£115,500 £168,909
The
Subscribers
(ii) AIBIM,
a subsidiary of the AIB Group, is engaged in the business of corporate finance
and is manager of a designated investment fund, the AIB Fund. Erin Executor
& Trustee Co Ltd is the trustee of the fund. The AIB fund acquired 45,455
new ordinary £1 shares in Prince of Wales Hotel Ltd at a substantial
premium under the agreement.
(iii)BTHIC
is engaged in the business of corporate finance and in the promotion and
management of designated investment funds. It is manager of a designated
investment fund, the BTH Fund. The BTH fund acquired 7,954 £1 ordinary
shares in the company at a substantial premium under the agreement. BTHIC is
also manager of another designated investment fund, the Tourism and Business
Expansion Fund, which subscribed for 30,000 shares in Prince of Wales Hotel Ltd
in 1990. These latter shares were subject to a Put and Call option exercisable
in 1995.
The
Covenantors
(iv) O'Gorman
Group (Athlone) Ltd was a private company holding 56,625 shares in the Prince
of Wales Hotel Ltd. A Receiver was appointed over the company in January 1994.
O'Gorman Group Athlone Ltd In Receivership continues to be a covenantor to the
agreement and a shareholder in Prince of Wales Hotel Ltd.
(v) John
O'Gorman was a director of Prince of Wales Hotel Ltd and was the beneficial
owner of the entire issued capital of O'Gorman Group (Athlone) Ltd. He resigned
from the board of directors of Prince of Wales Hotel Ltd in April 1993.
(vi)
Zanatti Investments is an Irish registered company holding 28,875 shares in the
Prince of Wales Hotel Ltd.
(vii)
Dr. Ribeiro, who had an address in Portugal was beneficial owner of the entire
issued share capital of Zanatti. He ceased to be the beneficial owner of that
company in May 1993.
The
four parties at (iv) to (vii) above are covenantors to the agreement.
(c) Designated
Investment Funds
4. Under
the BES scheme (Relief for Investments in Corporate Trades as introduced in the
1984 Finance Act with subsequent amendments) taxpayers may obtain tax relief in
respect of subscription for shares in companies engaged in qualifying trades.
The shares must represent new issued ordinary shares in an unquoted company and
must be held for a minimum period of 5 years. Similar tax relief is also given
where the subscription is made to a designated investment fund (designated by
the Revenue Commissioners) where the monies subscribed are invested on the
taxpayer's behalf in qualifying companies. The
Designated Investment Funds Act
1985 declares that a designated investment fund is not a unit trust and
requires that a prospectus should be prepared in respect of each such fund
which must be first approved by the Minister for Enterprise and Employment.
Approval may not be given unless the Minister is satisfied that satisfactory
statements on a number of specified issues are included in the prospectus
including details of the manager and of the separate trustee, that the holder
of any shares issued to the Fund will be registered as nominee for a particular
participant and particulars of the arrangements for transfer of the shares into
the participant's name after 5 years. In practice each designated investment
fund is governed by a trust deed which provides for the holding of the monies
subscribed by a trustee, in whose name shares purchased by the Fund are
initially registered as nominee for each particular subscriber, and the
management of the fund by a manager, who has responsibility for selecting the
investments and safeguarding the subscribers' interests in the investee
companies. There are generally provisions in the trust deed for disposal of
the shares after 5 years by the trustee/manager either by way of sale (with
each subscriber getting his share of the proceeds) or transfer into the
subscriber's name. Mechanisms may be included to facilitate the sale or
redemption of the shares including Put and Call options whereby the original
shareholders of the investee companies after a period of 5 years may opt to or
can be required to purchase the Fund's shares. If however the shares in an
investee company cannot be satisfactorily disposed of, there are provisions for
their transfer some time after into the subscriber's name and the trust ends.
Unlike an UCIT or investment company, the individual subscriber does not hold
units in the Fund but holds the beneficial interest in his proportion of the
shares acquired through the fund. According to the Bord Failte Report for 1992,
£37m was raised in BES funding in 1991 for tourism related projects.
Following an amendment in the
Finance Act 1991 the eligibility of hotel,
guesthouse and self catering projects under the BES scheme was removed.
(d) The
Market
5. According
to the 1992 Review of the Irish Hotel Industry there were 668 hotels in the
State in 1991 with 21,967 rooms. The current Bord Failte Guide shows that there
are 6 registered hotels in Athlone with a total room capacity of 202, including
118 rooms in two 3 star hotels, Hodson Bay and Prince of Wales, and 26 rooms in
the 2 star Shamrock Lodge Hotel. The 1992 Review shows that, in 1991, on
average, sales of food made up 38% of hotel revenues with revenue from rooms
accounting for 33% and bar receipts 25%. For Grade B* hotels revenue from rooms
represented 27%, with food contributing 39% and beverages 31.5%. On average
Irish guests take up around 45% of hotel bed nights but the average for Grade
B* hotels was 48.8%. Irish guests include a large proportion of the business
guests who take up on average 28% of bed nights. The ratio for Irish guests is
higher than average in Leinster (excluding Dublin) where it was 66% in 1991.
According to the Statistical Bulletin issued by the Central Statistics Office,
the number of overseas visits to the State increased from 2.345m in 1988 to
3.3m in 1993 with visitor spending (excluding international fares) increasing
from £566m to £980m. It appears however that the impact of this
increase on hotel occupancy has been much less significant particularly outside
Dublin. While therefore the growth in tourism numbers has an important impact
on the overall hotel business, the Prince of Wales Hotel is also heavily
reliant on more locally based business in respect of which it competes with the
other hotels in the locality of Athlone. The geographical market is therefore
primarily the Athlone area, although in the case of foreign tourists the hotel
is to some extent competing with others located throughout the State.
(e) The
Notified Arrangements
6.(i)The
notified agreement was made on 30 August 1991 to provide for the take up by the
AIB and BTH funds of new ordinary shares in the Prince of Wales Hotel Ltd (the
Company) and to regulate the relationship between the various shareholders and
the future conduct of the company. The agreement continues as long as the
BTH/AIBIM managed funds continue to hold shares in the company.
(ii) The
agreement provides for preconditions for the investment, warranties by the
covenantors and the subscription arrangements. It also provides for covenants
regarding the operation of the company in an efficient businesslike manner
including regulation of the Board's business, appointment of BTH/AIBIM nominee
directors and arrangements for the provision of information to the new
investors. It lists restricted transactions which require the prior consent in
writing of the new investors. Under clause 8.1 the covenantors are restricted
from disposing of their shares in the company except with the consent in
writing of the new investors and no covenantor may transfer his shares unless
the proposing transferee has entered into a deed of adherence to bind him to
the agreement. The covenantors agree to protect the BES status of the company.
Provision is made for the exercise of Put and Call options on the new shares,
which are exercisable after the 5th and before the 10th anniversary of the
agreement, whereby the covenantors may, or may be required, to purchase the
AIBIM and BTH Funds' shares in the company at a profit or asset related price.
(iii)
Clause 7.1 of the agreement contains the following competition covenants
"7.1
Competition
Covenant
Each
of the Covenantors hereby covenants with and undertakes to each of the Manager
(on behalf of itself and the Subscriber as trustee for the AIB Fund Investors)
and BTH (on behalf of itself and the Trustee as trustee for the BTH Fund
Investors) and the
Company
during the continuance of this Agreement that he or it shall not, and shall
procure that no Connected Person of he or it or shall, either on its own
account or jointly with or on behalf of any person, and whether as principal,
agent, partner, director, employee, consultant, shareholder or otherwise
howsoever and whether directly or indirectly:-
(i) carry
on or assist or be engaged concerned or interested (except as the holder or
beneficial owner for investment purposes of not more than 5% in nominal value
of any class of a company's securities listed or dealt on a recognised stock
exchange)in any business within Ireland which competes with the Business of the
Company provided however that this restriction shall not apply to any interest
in the Shamrock Lodge Country House Hotel Limited;
(ii) canvass
or solicit or endeavour to canvass or solicit the custom of or endeavour to
entice away from the Company any person who was at any time during the
continuance of this Agreement a supplier to or customer of or in the course or
habit of dealing with the Company in relation to the Business;
(iii)
solicit or entice away or endeavour to solicit or entice away any employee or
executive of or consultant to the Company whether or not such person would
commit a breach of contract by reason of leaving the employment or service of
the Company."
(f) Submission
of the Parties
7. AIBIM
in its submission stated that the restrictive covenants in the agreement are
the standard clauses which are found in most loan, share subscription and BES
agreements for corporate institutions. The covenants seek to ensure that:
-
the investment made in the Company is not undermined by parties to the agreement
-
the goodwill of the company is maintained
-
the expert knowledge built up by the Company is available for the duration of
the agreement.
Assessment
(a) Section
4(1)
8.
Section
4(1) of the
Competition Act 1991 prohibits and renders void all agreements
between undertakings, decisions by associations of undertakings and concerted
practices which have as their object or effect the prevention, restriction or
distortion of competition in trade in any goods or services in the State, or in
any part of the State.
(b) The
Undertakings.
9.
Section
3(1) of the
Competition Act defines an undertaking as "a person being an
individual, a body corporate or an unincorporated body of persons engaged for
gain in the production, supply or distribution of goods or the provision of a
service".
10. At
the date of the notified agreement O'Gorman Group (Athlone) Ltd held 49% of the
equity of Prince of Wales Hotel Ltd while Zanatti Investments held 25%. They
were the original owners of the company and held options to acquire the
remaining shares in the company after 4/5 years. These companies were engaged
for gain in hotel investment and are therefore undertakings. John O'Gorman was
the beneficial owner of O'Gorman Group and Dr. Ribeiro was the beneficial owner
of Zanatti and they were therefore undertakings. AIBIM and BTH are each
engaged in corporate finance and are managers of designated investment funds
for which they are in receipt of fees and commission. They are therefore
undertakings. Erin Executor & Trustee Co Ltd is also engaged in corporate
finance and is an undertaking. Prince of Wales Hotel Ltd is engaged in the
hotel business and is an undertaking. The notified agreement is an agreement
between undertakings. The agreement has effect within the State.
(c) Applicability
of Section 4(1)
11. The
Share Subscription and Shareholders Agreement constitutes an agreement whereby
two
designated investment funds have agreed to make venture capital type
investments to each obtain a minority shareholding in the Prince of Wales Hotel
Ltd. This, in effect, involves an investment by a large number of small
personal investors for a combined minority stake in the company. Such an
agreement is not
per
se
anti-competitive and does not offend against
Section 4(1) of the
Competition
Act.
12. The
agreement contains continuing contractual commitments arising from the
agreement including the warranties given by the original shareholders to the
new investors and the Put and Call options. These do not raise issues under
the
Competition Act. The agreement also provides for a number of obligations
on each of the parties which will govern how the company will be managed
including such matters as the composition of the Board of Directors, the
frequency of board meetings and the information requirements to keep the
managers of the AIBIM and BTH Funds informed of the company's progress. These
are matters internal to the management of the company which are designed to
protect the minority shareholding position of the new investors and do not
raise issues under the
Competition Act.
13. The
agreement also contains a list of restricted transactions which the company may
not undertake without the prior written consent of AIBIM and BTH. These
include such actions as a change in the nature of the business carried on, the
issue of new shares or options, entering into onerous or unusual contracts,
capital expenditure above specified limits, disposal of substantial assets and
excessive borrowing. AIBIM and BTHIC are each engaged in the management of a
form of a venture capital fund, albeit a tax driven designated investment fund,
and are acting on behalf of many personal BES investors who hold the beneficial
interest in the Funds' shares in the company. Neither AIBIM or BTH are engaged
in the hotel business as such but as Fund managers they have a duty to
safeguard the interests of the BES subscribers for whom the shares in Prince of
Wales Ltd are held in trust. With no particular expertise in the Athlone hotel
business AIBIM and BTH are dependent on the majority shareholders for the day
to day management and supervision of the business. As indicated in Cambridge -
ACT/Imari
[1]
the Authority takes the view that providers of venture or development capital
are entitled to take steps to protect their investment. The restrictions on
transactions imposed on the operation of Prince of Wales Hotel Ltd are designed
to protect that investment by ensuring that the assets of the company are not
substantially (or even artificially) diluted without their knowledge. They may
be regarded as prudent protection of the minority shareholder interest and no
more than is necessary to achieve the object of protecting the investment. In
any event the restrictions are more related to the internal running of the
company rather than its trading activities. The Authority does not therefore
regard these restrictions as offending against
Section 4(1) of the
Competition
Act.
14. Clause
7 of the agreement imposes non-compete and non-solicit restrictions on the
original shareholders, i.e. on John O'Gorman, O'Gorman Group (Athlone) Ltd,
Dr.Ribeiro and Zanatti Investments Ltd for the term of the agreement which
prevents any of them from
- being in any way involved in a business within the State competing with
Prince of Wales Hotel Ltd. The restriction does not apply to an
interest in the Shamrock Lodge Hotel, Athlone
- soliciting to entice away any customer, supplier or employee of the company
As
indicated in their decision on Cambridge-ACT/Imari, the Authority regards such
restrictions as ancillary to the agreement to invest provided that it meets the
test that the non-competition clauses are necessary to protect the investment
and, if so, that their content and purpose does not go beyond what is necessary
to achieve this.
15. In
their decision on Cambridge-ACT/Imari the Authority indicated that, in general,
a restriction on parties in a business competing with it for so long as they
remain part of the business, does not offend against
Section 4(1). Insofar as
the non-compete or non-solicit restrictions apply to the period when the
covenantors remain shareholders in the company these provisions therefore do
not offend against
Section 4(1) of the
Competition Act.
16. The
non-compete and non-solicit restrictions apply as long as either Fund holds
shares in the company and under certain circumstances, therefore, the
restrictions continue to apply to a covenantor after an effective disposal of
it or his shares in the company. AIBIM claim that the restrictions in the
agreement are found, inter alia, in most corporate loan agreements. The
Authority accepts that in the case of a loan agreement it is not
anti-competitive to have, as a condition of the loan, a restriction on the
principals, for the duration of the agreement, from leaving their company and
setting up in direct competition with it and soliciting its customers and
employees. While for tax reasons the notified agreement involves a subscription
for shares, the overall arrangements are such as to be similar to that of a
loan. Under the notified agreement substantial free capital has been put into
the company with provision for its redemption by the company's principals after
5 years. It is not a purchase of business agreement. The principal objective
of the Fund managers is to be able to redeem the investments as soon as
possible after the end of the BES statutory period of 5 years, pass the
proceeds on to the subscribers and wind up the trust. The agreement applies
only for a limited time. If during this time the covenantors were able to
withdraw from the business, and were then free to open another business in
direct competition with it and solicit staff, customers and suppliers from it,
the business of the Prince of Wales Hotel Ltd could be severely damaged putting
the investment in jeopardy. The Authority believes that the application of the
non-compete or non-solicit restriction, for the term of the agreement, is in
these circumstances necessary to protect the interests of the minority
shareholders without which the investment would not have been made and the
restriction does not, therefore, offend against
Section 4(1) of the
Competition
Act, 1991.
The
Decision
17. In
the Authority's opinion John O'Gorman, O'Gorman Group (Athlone) Ltd, Zanatti
Ltd, Dr. Ribeiro, AIB Investment Managers Ltd, Erin Executor & Trustee Co
Ltd, Business and Trading House Investment Company Ltd, and Prince of Wales
Hotel Ltd are undertakings within the meaning of
Section 3(1) of the
Competition Act, 1991 and the notified share subscription and shareholders
agreement is an agreement between undertakings. In the Authority's opinion the
notified agreement does not offend against
Section 4(1) of the
Competition Act,
1991
The
Certificate
18. The
Competition Authority has issued the following certificate:
The
Competition Authority certifies that, in its opinion, on the basis of the facts
in its possession, the Share Subscription and Shareholders Agreement of 30
August 1991 between John O'Gorman, O'Gorman Group (Athlone) Ltd, Dr. Ribeiro,
Zanatti Investments Ltd, AIB Investment Managers Ltd, Erin Executor &
Trustee Co.Ltd, Business and Trading House Investment Company Ltd and Prince
of Wales Hotel Ltd notified under
Section 7(2) on 30 September 1992
(notification no. CA/431/92E) does not offend against
Section 4(1) of the
Competition Act, 1991
For
the Competition Authority.
Des
Wall
Member.
25
April 1995
[ ] 1Decision
No. 24 21 June 1993
© 1995 Irish Competition Authority