← All Authorities
United States Leading Case conflict of interest s175minority protection

Tornetta v Musk

C.A. No. 2018-0408-KSJM (Del. Ch. 2024)
JurisdictionUnited States
CourtDelaware Court of Chancery
Year2024
StatusBinding authority

Summary

Board compensation decisions favouring a controlling stockholder require entire fairness review; subsequent stockholder ratification does not restore business judgment deference.

Key Principle

A board compensation decision for a controlling stockholder is reviewed under entire fairness; subsequent stockholder ratification does not restore business judgment review.

Area of Law

corporate

Related Cases

ASIC v Cassimatis (No 8) (2016) 336 ALR 209

Directors breached their duty of care under s.180 Corporations Act by failing to prevent the company from providing inappropriate financial advice to retail clients.

Slack Technologies LLC v Pirani 598 U.S. 759 (2023)

Section 11 of the Securities Act requires plaintiffs to trace their shares to the allegedly misleading registration statement; claims fail where shares cannot be so traced in a direct listing.

In re Tesla Motors Inc Stockholder Litigation CA No. 12711-VCS (Del. Ch. 2023)

Delaware Court of Chancery rescinded Elon Musk's $55.8bn compensation package as an unfair self-dealing transaction where the board lacked independence and failed the entire fairness standard.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Tornetta v Musk and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Tornetta v Musk