• At Kemp Little, we are known for our ability to serve the very particular needs of a large but diverse technology client base. Our hands-on industry know-how makes us a good fit with many of the world's biggest technology and digital media businesses, yet means we are equally relevant to companies with a technology bias, in sectors such as professional services, financial services, retail, travel and healthcare.
  • Kemp Little specialises in the technology and digital media sectors and provides a range of legal services that are crucial to fast-moving, innovative businesses.Our blend of sector awareness, technical excellence and responsiveness, means we are regularly ranked as a leading firm by directories such as Legal 500, Chambers and PLC Which Lawyer. Our practice areas cover a wide range of legal issues and advice.
  • Our Commercial Technology team has established itself as one of the strongest in the UK. We are ranked in Legal 500, Chambers & Partners and PLC Which Lawyer, with four of our partners recommended.
  • Our team provides practical and commercial advice founded on years of experience and technical know-how to technology and digital media companies that need to be alert to the rules and regulations of competition law.
  • Our Corporate Practice has a reputation for delivering sound legal advice, backed up with extensive industry experience and credentials, to get the best results from technology and digital media transactions.
  • In the fast-changing world of employment law our clients need practical, commercial and cost-effective advice. They get this from our team of employment law professionals.
  • Our team of leading IP advisors deliver cost-effective, strategic and commercial advice to ensure that your IP assets are protected and leveraged to add real value to your business.
  • Our litigation practice advises on all aspects of dispute resolution, with a particular focus on ownership, exploitation and infringement of intellectual property rights and commercial disputes in the technology sector.
  • We have an industry-leading reputation for our outsourcing expertise. Our professionals deliver credible legal advice to providers and acquirers of IT and business process outsourcing (BPO) services.
  • We work alongside companies, many with disruptive technologies, that seek funding, as well as with the venture capital firms, institutional investors and corporate ventures that want to invest in exciting business opportunities.
  • Our regulatory specialists work alongside Kemp Little’s corporate and commercial professionals to help meet their compliance obligations.
  • With a service that is commercial and responsive to our clients’ needs, you will find our tax advice easy to understand, cost-effective and geared towards maximising your tax benefits.
  • At Kemp Little, we advise clients in diverse sectors where technology is fundamental to the ongoing success of their businesses.They include companies that provide technology as a service and businesses where the use of technology is key to their business model, enabling them to bring their product or service to market.
  • We bring our commercial understanding of digital business models, our legal expertise and our reputation for delivering high quality, cost-effective services to this dynamic sector.
  • Acting for market leaders and market changers within the media industry, we combine in-depth knowledge of the structural technology that underpins content delivery and the impact of digitisation on the rights of producers and consumers.
  • We understand the risks facing this sector and work with our clients to conquer those challenges. Testimony to our success is the continued growth in our team of professionals and the clients we serve.
  • We advise at the forefront of the technological intersection between life sciences and healthcare. We advise leading technology and data analytics providers, healthcare institutions as well as manufacturers of medical devices, pharmaceuticals and biotechnological products.
  • For clients operating in the online sector, our teams are structured to meet their commercial, financing, M&A, competition and regulatory, employment and intellectual property legal needs.
  • Our focus on technology makes us especially well positioned to give advice on the legal aspects of digital marketing. We advise on high-profile, multi-channel, cross-border cases and on highly complex campaigns.
  • The mobile and telecoms sector is fast changing and hugely dependent on technology advances. We help mobile and wireless and fixed telecoms clients to tackle the legal challenges that this evolving sector presents.
  • Whether ERP, Linux or Windows; software or infrastructure as a service in the cloud, in a virtualised environment, or as a mobile or service-oriented architecture, we have the experience to resolve legal issues across the spectrum of commercial computer platforms.
  • Our clients trust us to apply our solutions and know-how to help them make the best use of technology in structuring deals, mitigating key risks to their businesses and in achieving their commercial objectives.
  • We have extensive experience of advising customers and suppliers in the retail sector on technology development, licensing and supply projects, and in advising on all aspects of procurement and online operations.
  • Our legal professionals work alongside social media providers and users in relation to the commercial, privacy, data, advertising, intellectual property, employment and corporate issues that arise in this dynamic sector.
  • Our years of working alongside diverse software clients have given us an in-depth understanding of the dynamics of the software marketplace, market practice and alternative negotiating strategies.
  • Working with direct providers of travel services, including aggregators, facilitators and suppliers of transport and technology, our team has developed a unique specialist knowledge of the sector
  • Your life as an entrepreneur is full of daily challenges as you seek to grow your business. One of the key strengths of our firm is that we understand these challenges.
  • Kemp Little is trusted by some of the world’s leading luxury brands and some of the most innovative e-commerce retailers changing the face of the industry.
  • HR Bytes is an exclusive, comprehensive, online service that will provide you with a wide range of practical, insightful and current employment law information. HR Bytes members get priority booking for events, key insight and a range of employment materials for free.
  • FlightDeck is our portal designed especially with start-up and emerging technology businesses in mind to help you get your business up and running in the right way. We provide a free pack of all the things no-one tells you and things they don’t give away to get you started.

M&A Diligence: when term sheets can be legally binding

In the recent case of New Media Holding Company LLC v Kuznetsov [2016] EWHC 360, the High Court held that a term sheet signed between Mr Gusinski (Mr G) and Mr Kuznetsov (Mr K) was legally binding.  Even though the document referred to itself as being a “Term Sheet describing principal terms and conditions of Company share management and control” and, on the face of the document, made no reference to consideration, the judge found it to be contractually enforceable.

Mr G and Mr K were the ultimate beneficial holders of interests in Energokom LLC, a Latvian company which was part of a group providing atomic energy services in the Ukraine.  The term sheet at the centre of the dispute was signed in January 2010 and provided that Mr G had the right at any time after the date of the term sheet to require Energokom to acquire Mr G’s shares in Energokom for an amount of US$333,333 (plus a 9% interest coupon).  In October 2012, Mr G requested that his shares be “redeemed” in accordance with the term sheet.  Mr K contented (amongst other things) that Mr G had no right to rely on the term sheet as it was not legally enforceable.       

The High Court judgement provides a neat summary of the elements required for a binding agreement (intention to form legal relations plus consideration), as well as the weight which may be placed on evidential factors in order to conclude whether or not a contract can be said to be binding.  A number of helpful criteria can be pulled from the judgement:

  • the condition that there must be an intention to create legal relations does not depend on the parties’ subjective intentions, rather the “reasonable expectations of honest sensible businessmen” (see RTS Ltd v Molkerei Alois Muller GmbH & Co [2010] UKSC 14);
  • the party asserting that there was no such intention has the burden of establishing it (see Attrill v Dresdner Kleinwort Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 394);
  • where the parties are in a pre-existing contractual relationship, there will be a strong presumption that they intend to create legal relations when they subsequently enter into further agreements;
  • subsequent conduct can be taken into account as objective evidence of whether or not the parties understand that they had formed a binding agreement; and
  • contracts which do not contain consideration from both parties in and of themselves may be enforceable if part of a “package agreement” where mutual consideration is provided as part of the overall package.

The judge found that although the phrase “term sheet” is often used in a commercial context to describe a framework used to develop a more comprehensive legal document, there is no rule that a document called a “term sheet” cannot be binding on the parties signing it.  Despite Mr K arguing that the term sheet was a “casual and informal” document, the Court was swayed by the fact that it had been drafted by lawyers and the rights granted to Mr G were expressed in unqualified legal terms. It even contained an express governing law and jurisdiction clause, the purpose of which the court found difficult to understand “absent an intention to create a legally binding agreement”. The term sheet was therefore deemed to be legally binding and not “merely a document that was aspirational”.

Although the term sheet itself provided no benefit to Mr K, the court found that on the facts it represented a “clear and logical quid pro quo” for Mr G’s agreement to provide further funding to Energokom (agreed separately outside the confines of the term sheet).  On that basis, consideration could be established and the term sheet was legally enforceable.

To avoid such disputes, it is important to be clear on the face of any term sheet whether it is intended to bind the signatories (the simple addition of the words “subject to contract” is a good start, but even this has been successfully challenged in cases where the parties act as the term sheet intended).  Conversely, if the term sheet is intended to be legally binding, care should be taken to make sure it meets the necessary contractual requirements to be enforceable.

For further information, please contact Andy Moseby.