Musk $55.8 bn Tesla pay deal again rejected by US judge

Musk $55.8 bn Tesla pay deal again rejected by US judge

Tesla shareholders originally backed the Elon Musk compensation plan in March 2018
Tesla shareholders originally backed the Elon Musk compensation plan in March 2018. Photo: Allison ROBBERT / POOL/AFP/File
Source: AFP

Don't miss out! Get your daily dose of sports news straight to your phone. Join YEN's Sports News channel on WhatsApp now!

A US judge on Monday upheld her decision to reject Elon Musk's massive $55.8 billion compensation package at Tesla, denying an attempt to restore the pay deal through a shareholder vote.

In a court filing, Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick of Delaware's Court of Chancery ruled that Tesla's attempt to ratify Musk's compensation package through a June shareholder vote could not override her January decision striking down the package as excessive and unfair to shareholders.

McCormick found multiple flaws in Tesla's ratification attempt, including "material misstatements" in documents provided to shareholders about the effect of their vote.

"The motion to revise is denied," McCormick wrote.

"The large and talented group of defense firms got creative with the ratification argument, but their unprecedented theories go against multiple strains of settled law," she added.

The court also awarded $345 million in attorney fees, significantly less than the $5.6 billion requested by the lawyers of plaintiff Richard Tornetta, a Tesla shareholder.

Read also

Vietnam property tycoon on death row faces appeal verdict

While acknowledging their calculation method was technically sound under Delaware law, which bases fees on the percentage of benefit achieved, McCormick ruled that such a large award would constitute an excessive windfall.

Shareholders originally backed the Musk compensation plan in March 2018 that was specifically designed to reward the 53-year-old founder for Tesla's significant growth.

But in a lawsuit, Tornetta accused the defendants of failing in their duties when they authorized the pay plan and alleged that Musk dictated his terms to directors, who were not sufficiently independent from their star CEO.

He also accused Musk of "unjustified enrichment" and asked for the annulment of a pay program that helped make the entrepreneur the richest man in the world.

During a trial in 2022, Musk countered that investors in Tesla were some of the "most sophisticated in the world" and able to keep tabs on his management.

He said Tesla had been the laughingstock of the auto industry, and it was only the massive success of the company's Model 3 that turned things around.

Read also

Norway suspends deep-sea mining projects: govt allies

Musk insisted that he played no role in coming up with the package nor discussed his deal with the board members, some of them close friends, who ultimately signed off on it.

The Delaware Court of Chancery has been a pillar of US capitalism for more than a century and is the jurisdiction where roughly two-thirds of American Fortune 500 companies are registered.

New feature: Сheck out news that is picked for YOU ➡️ click on “Recommended for you” and enjoy!

Source: AFP

Authors:
AFP avatar

AFP AFP text, photo, graphic, audio or video material shall not be published, broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed directly or indirectly in any medium. AFP news material may not be stored in whole or in part in a computer or otherwise except for personal and non-commercial use. AFP will not be held liable for any delays, inaccuracies, errors or omissions in any AFP news material or in transmission or delivery of all or any part thereof or for any damages whatsoever. As a newswire service, AFP does not obtain releases from subjects, individuals, groups or entities contained in its photographs, videos, graphics or quoted in its texts. Further, no clearance is obtained from the owners of any trademarks or copyrighted materials whose marks and materials are included in AFP material. Therefore you will be solely responsible for obtaining any and all necessary releases from whatever individuals and/or entities necessary for any uses of AFP material.