What defences have been adopted by Japanese companies against the threat of hostile takeovers?
Takeover deals in Japan have generally involved co-operative discussions with the board of directors. There have been a few exceptions, one being Livedoor purchasing a large amount of Nippon Broadcasting shares on the Tokyo Stock Exchange. The target then issued an option to a family shareholder to acquire a big enough stake to block a hostile bidder but the court did not approve that. There has also been talk about implementing shareholder rights plans, so-called poison pills, and that will be an evolutionary process. Takeover defences are structural measures to buy a company time to evaluate strategic options and negotiate the right deal and the best deal, instead of being forced into a deal quickly. But a poison pill can entrench incumbent management and lead to a situation that prohibits hostile takeovers and there are consequences for shareholder value in doing that. How have the courts and legislature responded to the issue of hostile takeovers? So far they have responded in a li
