Thanks II.
I would note that while those laws do not seems very helpful for employees, at least a mechanism exists where jobs have to be offered. Businesses with no employees generally are not very successful so while fat trimming is possible, the idea that no one will get a job in a merged entity is unlikely. And of course there is the optics and union/ CBA angle as well, esp in Australia.
For everyone else asking.
Laws apply in the country the events take place in. TUPE as a law came across under Brexit so 'British TUPE' will apply to the UK entity (my last check is from Feb 2021 and the law was not amended from the EU version). The Danish entity is still subject to 'full EU' TUPE. Under EU law it was illegal for 100% foreign ownership of businesses in the EU. An EU shareholder had to have more than 50% and thus control. This is the purpose of the shareholder in Switzerland (Ivan Levy/ EAA), known as a silent shareholder. Generally these silent shareholders do nothing other than legitimise the entity for ownership rules (in exchange for a nice fee of course) and there will be management documents underneath that ownership structure which essentially neuter that shareholding to make (in this case) CHC LLC the controller of entity. Under Brexit, the UK Government might wish to change so that all businesses have to be 50% British owned and Mr Levy will be managed aside.
None of this changes that UK/ Danish/ Australian entities are subject to local law, and not Cayman/ US/ any other. The HQ of CHC LLC is irrelevant. Helitr also touched on this in post 49.
Last edited by nowherespecial; 15th Mar 2021 at 06:14.