Contracts, Consents & Change of Control

Who holds a veto over your deal that you did not know about.

Sellers assume the parties to a business sale are the buyer and the seller. In practice a bank, a landlord, a leasing company, a franchisor and two or three large customers may each hold something close to a veto — and the consents, not the drafting, are what set the completion date.

Two Different Problems, Depending on Structure

On an asset sale, contracts do not transfer automatically — each must be assigned or novated, and most either restrict assignment or require consent. In practice a deal concentrates on the material ones: key customer contracts, principal supplier arrangements, the lease, finance and leasing agreements, licences and permits, and anything the business cannot operate without. On a share sale that problem largely disappears, because the contracting company never changes — and is replaced by a subtler one. A change-of-control clause entitles a counterparty to terminate, renegotiate or demand repayment precisely because ownership or control has changed, which is the one thing a share sale definitively does. Those clauses sit in banking facilities, equipment leasing and hire purchase, franchise agreements, software and technology licences, distribution and agency agreements, and increasingly in ordinary customer contracts — particularly with larger customers and public bodies. The trap is that everyone assumes a share sale avoids consents, so nobody reads for them.

Finding Them, and Deciding When to Ask

You find them by reading the contracts — which is exactly the exercise most owner-managed businesses have never done. That is why it sits on the readiness list: a seller who has assembled the material contracts and identified what each says about assignment and change of control can plan the deal, while a seller who has not meets the same information in due diligence, presented by the buyer’s solicitor at a moment when it looks like a problem rather than a plan. When to approach counterparties is a genuine judgement, not a rule. Approaching customers, landlords and lenders discloses that the business is for sale — commercially sensitive, and capable of unsettling relationships if the deal then collapses. Leaving it late makes consents the critical path and moves the completion date. The usual compromise: identify every required consent at the outset, prepare the approaches, and make them once the deal is advanced enough to justify the disclosure risk, typically after due diligence is substantially complete but well before signing. And if a key customer refuses, the buyer is not acquiring what they thought — the response is a condition, a price adjustment, or a retention released if the contract survives a period after completion. What is not a response is discovering the question at completion.

Do You Know Who Can Block Your Sale?

Bank, landlord, lessors, franchisor, key customers. Identifying every required consent at the outset is what keeps a completion date realistic - and it is a reading exercise, not an expensive one.

Call 01 5827148

Related Reading

Contracts & Consents - FAQs

A provision entitling a counterparty to do something - usually terminate, sometimes renegotiate or require repayment - if the ownership or control of the other contracting party changes. It matters most on a share sale, precisely because a share sale is otherwise the structure that avoids consents: the contracting company never changes, so nothing needs assigning, but a change-of-control clause is triggered by the very thing a share sale does. They appear routinely in banking facilities, equipment leasing and hire purchase, franchise agreements, software and technology licences, distribution and agency agreements, and increasingly in ordinary customer contracts, particularly with larger customers and public bodies.

General information, not legal advice. This website contains general information about Irish law on business sales and acquisitions. It is not legal advice and does not create a solicitor—client relationship. Every transaction turns on its own facts — the structure, the documents, the parties, the consents required — and advice on yours requires a consultation.

Nothing here is tax advice, and tax drives structure. The choice between an asset sale and a share sale is very largely a tax question, and it should be settled with your accountant or tax adviser, and by reference to Revenue’s own guidance, before heads of terms are signed rather than afterwards. This firm does not advise on tax, does not state rates, thresholds, reliefs or conditions, and does not indicate any tax outcome.

No valuation advice. This firm does not value businesses, does not suggest multiples and does not advise on price. Valuation is for accountants and corporate finance advisers, and it is a separate exercise from the legal work.

Never both sides of the same deal. The firm acts for buyers and, in separate transactions, for sellers — but never for both parties to the same sale. Conflicts are checked at first contact, before any substantive discussion, which is why the first email should name every individual and entity involved.

No outcome or timeline is promised. Nothing on this site states or implies that a transaction will complete, that a consent will be obtained, that a warranty claim will succeed, or that any deal will proceed to a particular timetable. Where another jurisdiction is involved, the law of that jurisdiction applies to what happens there and requires local advice; this firm advises on Irish law only.

Fees. Fees are agreed in writing with the client at the outset. In contentious business, a solicitor may not calculate fees or other charges as a percentage or proportion of any award or settlement.