At the recent initial hearing of the injunction application, the High Court judge sanctioned an order of undertakings placed on Yodel that restricts Polish group InPost’s ability to integrate the business, or from making any material changes spanning investment, leadership, restructuring, and changes to the workforce.
Prior to the announcement of the acquisition of Liverpool-headquartered Yodel by InPost on 17 April, Shift and its CEO Jacob Corlett – who also wholly owns Corja – formally put InPost on notice of its possession of warrants.
These warrants collectively assert rights to over 66% of Yodel’s share capital, a stake that would have handed it working control of Yodel. Notwithstanding this formal notification, InPost moved to acquire the parent of Yodel with the rights still in place.
Corlett said: “Whilst deeply frustrating that InPost announced an acquisition without clear ownership agreed, I’m pleased interim court protections are now in place. We’re confident the courts will uphold our rights.
“Hopefully, InPost will now review the situation properly and a meaningful dialogue can begin.
“Meanwhile, our priority remains safeguarding Yodel and its workforce and taking steps to enforce our rights through court proceedings, which I have zero doubt will be successful.”
Specifically, Yodel by court order is not able to now make changes to its share capital structure or issue new shares or register, approve, or otherwise permit the transfer of any of its shares; make changes to the composition of its board of directors; or take on new debt obligations (outside the ordinary course of business) or create any security or encumbrances.
It also cannot dispose of any assets with a market value of £25,000 or more (outside the ordinary course of business); enter into any commitment (save in respect of employment) with a duration of six months or more (outside the ordinary course of business); or terminate the employment of any employees, save for gross misconduct.
Finally, it cannot novate any contracts with customers to any other entity; or make any material alterations to the Yodel brand.
If Yodel, or any director or officer connected with it, breaks this order, they may be held to be in contempt of court. The order will remain in place until the outcome of a hearing of the applications takes place.
According to City AM, an InPost spokesperson said it was “extremely disappointing” that Corlett “is trying to hamper the operations of a business that has only now started to recover from his four months of leadership, after significant cash injection from InPost”.
The spokesperson added: “We are confident that the court will see this opportunistic and fanciful application for what it is and will dismiss Corlett’s attempts to seek an injunction.”
