On July 19, a judge ruled that Twitter’s lawsuit against Elon Musk for his millionaire purchase-sale agreement will go to a five-day trial in October, agreeing to the social network’s request for a fast procedure.
The legal battle between Twitter and Elon Musk began with a first hearing, a week after the Internet platform initiated legal proceedings against the CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, to force him to fulfill the acquisition commitment for 44 billion dollars set on Thursday. last April after he sought to terminate the agreement.
The decision of Judge Kathaleen McCormick, president of a court specialized in business law in Delaware, granted the victory of the first legal battle to Twitter, which demanded an accelerated procedure from September, so as not to prolong the period of uncertainty that paralyzes, partially, to its shareholders, employees and customers and that could be exacerbated by a costly and lengthy legal action.
For his part, the 51-year-old billionaire requested a trial in February 2023, citing a necessary delay in analyzing Twitter data. McCormick acknowledged that “the delays risked causing irreparable damage to Twitter.” In addition, he mentioned that it was not certain that Musk’s payment of damages would be enough to repair the damage suffered.
In its lawsuit, Twitter accused Elon Musk of showing “hypocrisy” and “bad faith.” Lawyers for the company believe that he has changed his mind in the face of the recent drop in stock valuations of technology companies.
Earlier in the hearing, Twitter’s lead attorney, William Savitt, lashed out against Musk by making his case for a speedy trial. Savitt said the continued uncertainty over the pending settlement and ongoing legal suit “affects Twitter every day, every hour and every day.” In addition, he highlighted what he described as the SpaceX founder’s “continued disparagement” of the platform, including through his own official Twitter account.
This issue that Musk says will require a complex review is a made-up issue, designed to complicate things and cause delays. The merger agreement doesn’t even mention ‘bots’ or ‘spam’.
On July 15, Elon Musk’s legal team had filed an appeal not to open hostilities before next year, arguing that experts will have to analyze “mountains of data” to demonstrate, as the billionaire claims, that the platform is full of automated accounts and spamwell above the five percent officially indicated.
During the hearing, Musk’s attorney, Andrew Rossman, responded by saying his client “has no incentive to keep this matter pending for very long.” In addition, he said that Musk remains one of Twitter’s largest shareholders and that the company did not sue the billionaire for alleged violations of the agreement until after legal action was taken to terminate it, suggesting that the company’s wait invalidates your desire for a speedy process.
We are not opposed to speed and full stop, we are not asking for years here. What we’re offering instead, Your Honor, is an incredibly quick and sensible timetable.
It remains to be seen whether Musk’s arguments to justify his exit from the Twitter deal will suffice during the trial. In any case, Kathaleen McCormick is best known for having forced a company, which had also tried to break a purchase agreement, to respect the merger agreement, a case similar to that of Elon Musk and Twitter.