A Delaware court has granted a partial victory on Twitter in its legal battle with Elon Musk ordering that the trial to resolve his bitter divorce take place in October.
St. Kathaleen Jude McCormick, the presiding judge of the Delaware Chancellery Court, ruled that the court case between the two parties will proceed in October at the latest.
Twitter initially called for a trial to begin as early as September and not take more than four days to argue, while Musk’s lawyers requested a court hearing in February or later, and for the court to grant both parties weeks to introduce yourself. their cases. They argued that an expedited trial would prevent the truth about the big problem robots have on Twitter from coming to light in a hasty trial.
The judge ruled that the case should only take about five days to be heard, a period of time much closer to what Twitter was asking for.
Fusion failed
The two sides face off in court over their high profile, but ultimately without success. In April, Musk proposed buying the social media company for more than $ 44 billion, due to concern that the company was not valuing freedom of speech the way it would like.
During the following weeks, however, Musk began to think.
He says he left the deal because Twitter failed to provide adequate information about the number of fake Twitter accounts, or “spam bots,” and that he has breached his obligations under the deal by firing senior executives. and lay off a significant Number of employees.
Twitter, in turn, accuses Musk of being insincere from the start and only showing interest in buying the company as an advertising ploy.
“It’s an attempt at sabotage. He’s doing everything he can to eliminate Twitter,” Twitter lawyer William Savitt told the judge.
He said Musk is trying to divert people by talking about robots on Twitter, even though that problem has nothing to do with the deal he signed and is simply trying to “conjure up an exit ramp for a deal that doesn’t have one.”
Musk’s attorney, Andrew Rossman, says the idea that Musk wants to sabotage the company is “absolute” because he is the second-largest shareholder, owning more than the company’s own board of directors.
“He has no interest in harming the company,” Rossman said.
As part of the original merger agreement, both parties agreed to pay a $ 1 billion rest fee to the other if either party withdrew, but both parties are now suing for much more than that.
Twitter specifically asked the court to rule on the matter quickly, as uncertainty and disorder outweigh the price of the company’s shares.
Twitter shares are currently worth less than $ 40 each, well below Musk’s bid price of more than $ 54 per share.
“The reality is that the delay threatens irreparable damage to vendors,” the judge said in reference to Twitter.