A comprehensive legal resource for business owners, directors and investors
Mergers, Acquisitions and Business Sales — what every buyer and seller needs to know
Q. Quelle est la différence entre une cession de parts et une cession d'actifs ?
This is one of the most fundamental questions in any business acquisition and the answer has significant tax, legal and commercial consequences for both parties.
In a share sale, the buyer acquires the shares in the target company. The company itself — with all its assets, liabilities, contracts, employees and history — continues to exist under new ownership. The buyer steps into the seller’s shoes as shareholder. Because the company is unchanged, all existing contracts, licences, leases and réglementaire approvals typically transfer automatically.
In an asset sale, the buyer acquires specific assets of the business — its goodwill, equipment, stock, intellectual property, customer contracts and so on — but does not buy the company itself. The buyer creates a clean break, taking only what it wants and leaving behind unwanted liabilities. However, contracts, licences and leases must each be individually novated or assigned, and employees transfer under TUPE (the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006).
Les principales différences dans la pratique :
- Les vendeurs préfèrent généralement la cession d'actions : cette solution est plus simple, les taux d'imposition des plus-values peuvent être moins élevés et l'abattement pour les entrepreneurs (désormais appelé ’ Business Asset Disposal Relief ») peut s'appliquer.
- Buyers often prefer an asset sale — they can cherry-pick assets and leave historic liabilities (such as tax disputes or employment claims) behind.
- Third-party consents are generally not required in a share sale but may be needed in an asset sale where contracts contenir change of control or assignment restrictions.
- SDLT (Stamp Duty Land Tax) applies on land transfers in an asset sale; stamp duty at 0.5% applies on shares in a share sale.
Q. Quelle est la procédure habituelle pour vendre une entreprise en Angleterre et au Pays de Galles ?
The sale of a private company in England and Wales typically follows a broadly consistent process, though the timeline and complexity va vary significantly depending on the size of the business, the number of parties involved and whether the deal is a negotiated sale or a competitive auction.
Les principales étapes sont les suivantes :
- Preparation: The seller prepares the business for sale — organising financial information, instructing solicitors and (usually) a corporate financer adviser or broker, and preparing an information memorandum for prospective buyers.
- Marketing and buyer identification: The business is presented to prospective buyers, either through a targeted approach or a wider auction process. Non-disclosure agreements are signed before detailed information is shared.
- Heads of terms: Once a preferred buyer is identified, the parties agree a set of heads of terms — a non-binding summary of the key commercial parameters of the deal (price, structure, timetable, exclusivity).
- Due diligence: The buyer investigates the target company thoroughly — reviewing financials, contracts, employment arrangements, propriété, IP, tax position, regulatory compliance et litigation history. Due diligence typically takes four to eight weeks for a mid-market transaction.
- Negotiation and documentation: While due diligence is ongoing, solicitors draft and negotiate the share purchase agreement, disclosure letter, and any ancillary documents (tax covenant, board minutes, service agreements, restrictive covenant deeds).
- Exchange and completion: The SPA is signed and, simultaneously or on a later date, the shares are transferred and the consideration is paid. Post-completion adjustments (such as completion accounts or working capital adjustments) may follow.
Une transaction simple prend généralement entre trois et six mois, depuis la signature de l'accord de principe jusqu'à sa finalisation. Les transactions complexes impliquant plusieurs parties ou nécessitant des autorisations réglementaires peuvent prendre beaucoup plus de temps.
Q. Qu'est-ce que la diligence raisonnable, et pourquoi est-elle importante ?
La diligence raisonnable est le processus par lequel un acquéreur examine la société cible avant de s'engager dans une acquisition. Elle constitue pour l'acquéreur la principale occasion de comprendre ce qu'il acquiert — et d'identifier les risques, les passifs et les problèmes susceptibles d'influencer soit le prix, soit la structure de la transaction.
La vérification juridique porte généralement sur :
- Structure de l'entreprise — examen des statuts, du registre des actions et de la structure du groupe.
- Contracts — examining material customer, supplier and third-party contracts for change of control provisions, termination rights and unusual obligations.
- Employment — reviewing employment contracts, bonus schemes, pension arrangements and any employment disputes ou tribunal claims.
- Propriété intellectuelle — vérification de la titularité des principaux éléments de propriété intellectuelle, des marques, des noms de domaine et des licences logicielles.
- Fiscalité — examen de l'historique fiscal de l'entreprise, de son dossier de conformité et de toute enquête en cours auprès du HMRC.
- Litiges — recensement de toute procédure judiciaire en cours ou susceptible d'être engagée.
Due diligence findings inform the warranty and indemnity negotiations in the SPA. Matters that are identified and disclosed by the seller may qualify the warranties, meaning the buyer accepts the risk of those matters. Issues that are not disclosed but later come to light may give rise to a warranty claim.
Un processus de vérification préalable rigoureux est essentiel pour les acquéreurs. Négliger cette vérification préalable — en particulier dans le cadre d'une procédure concurrentielle — peut conduire à l'acquisition de passifs imprévus pour lesquels l'acquéreur ne dispose d'aucun recours contractuel.
Q. Qu'est-ce qu'un protocole d'accord et a-t-il une valeur juridique contraignante ?
Heads of terms (also called a letter of intent or memorandum of understanding) are a written summary of the key commercial terms that the parties have agreed in principle before the formal legal documentation is drafted. They typically cover the price, payment structure, the identity of the seller and buyer, any deferred or contingent consideration, conditions to completion, and the proposed timetable.
In English law, heads of terms are generally not legally binding as to the principal commercial deal — they are a record of where the parties have got to, not a contract of sale. However, specific provisions within the heads of terms are often expressed to be legally binding, including:
- Exclusivité — engagement du vendeur à ne pas démarcher d'autres acheteurs pendant une période déterminée.
- Confidentialité — obligations réciproques de préserver la confidentialité des termes de l'accord proposé.
- Frais — une clause prévoyant que chaque partie supporte ses propres frais (ou, dans certains cas, que l'acheteur verse une indemnité de rupture s'il se retire).
Le fait que les clauses préliminaires soient, pour l'essentiel, non contraignantes ne signifie pas pour autant qu'elles soient sans importance. Dans la pratique, il est très difficile de revenir sur les conditions commerciales convenues au stade des clauses préliminaires au cours de la procédure judiciaire sans que cela n'entraîne un coût important en termes de réputation. Il est donc essentiel que les deux parties sollicitent un avis juridique avant de signer les clauses préliminaires, et non après.
Q. Qu'est-ce qu'une clause d'indexation sur les bénéfices futurs et dans quels cas est-elle utilisée ?
An earn-out is a deferred consideration mechanism by which part of the purchase price for a business is contingent on the future financial performance of the acquired company after completion. Rather than paying the full price on day one, the buyer agrees to pay supplémentaires consideration if agreed revenue, profit or other performance targets are met over a defined period (typically one to three years post-completion).
Les clauses d'indexation sur les bénéfices sont couramment utilisées lorsque :
- There is a valuation gap — the seller values the business at a higher level than the buyer is willing to pay on day one, and the earn-out bridges the difference.
- L'entreprise connaît une croissance rapide : un complément de prix permet au vendeur de tirer profit de la plus-value qu'il avait anticipée, mais que l'acheteur n'était pas disposé à payer d'avance.
- Key person risk is high — if the business value depends heavily on the founding management team, an earn-out incentivises them to remain and perform post-completion.
Earn-outs can be a source of significant dispute post-completion. Common areas of conflict include how the earn-out metrics are calculated, whether the buyer has operated the business in a way that artificially suppressed performance, and what accounting policies apply. Careful, detailed drafting of the earn-out mechanics — and specific protections for the seller regarding how the business is managed during the earn-out period — is essential.