(2021)粤09民终36号

Reference Case: Chen Biao v. Zou Guokui et al.

The Maoming Intermediate People's Court reviewed the repurchase agreement through the lens of market regulation and investor protection. Because the listed company and related parties failed to disclose a downside-protection buyback clause during the private placement and listing process, allowing intermediaries to issue compliance opinions stating that no special clauses existed, the arrangement harmed non-specific investors and transaction safety. Even if the agreement reflected the parties' true intent, it was held invalid for offending capital-market order and public policy.

Holding

The Maoming Intermediate People's Court reviewed the repurchase agreement through the lens of market regulation and investor protection. Because the listed company and related parties failed to disclose a downside-protection buyback clause during the private placement and listing process, allowing intermediaries to issue compliance opinions stating that no special clauses existed, the arrangement harmed non-specific investors and transaction safety. Even if the agreement reflected the parties' true intent, it was held invalid for offending capital-market order and public policy.

Issues

the validity of an undisclosed buyback VAM used in a NEEQ listed company's private placementthe consequences of violating Disclosure Q&A III and intermediary verification requirementsthe role of public policy and capital-market order in VAM disputes