Key Points The decision clarifies that a party’s using a contractual gap to “intentionally harm” the counterparty may constitute a breach of the implied covenant. The court rejected ASM’s argument that the parties had intentionally left a contractual gap with respect to the efforts ASM had to use to obtain the consents, in order to allocate […]

Source: Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance

Published: 2026-07-25T11:30:11Z