Company: SMNR
Filing Date: 2025-07-23
Form Type: S-4/A
Source: 0001193125-25-163401
Chunk: 659

Company: Semnur Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-07-23
Form: S-4/A
Chunk 659
---
 or meeting summoned for that purpose. The convening of the meetings and subsequently the terms of the arrangement must be sanctioned by the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands. While a dissenting shareholder would have the right to express to the court the view that the transaction should not be approved, the court can be expected to approve the arrangement if it satisfies itself that:

| • |     | we are not proposing to act illegally or beyond the scope of our corporate authority and the statutory provisions as to majority vote have been complied with; |

| • |     | the shareholders have been fairly represented at the meeting in question; |

| • |     | the arrangement is one that an intelligent and honest person acting in respect of their interest in the relevant shares would reasonably approve; and |

| • |     | the arrangement is not one that would more properly be sanctioned under some other provision of the Companies Act or that would amount to a “fraud on the minority.” |

403

If a scheme of arrangement or takeover offer (as described below) is approved, any dissenting shareholder would have no rights comparable to appraisal rights (providing rights to the fair value of the shares judicially determined and to consequent payment), which would otherwise ordinarily be available to dissenting shareholders of mergers of United States corporations. Squeeze-outprovisions.The Companies Act also contains a statutory power of compulsory acquisition which may facilitate the “squeeze out” of dissentient minority shareholder upon a tender offer. When a takeover offer is made and accepted by holders of 90% of the shares to whom the offer relates within four months, the offeror may, within a two-monthperiod, require the holders of the remaining shares to transfer such shares to the offeror on the terms of the offer. An objection can be made to the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands, but this is unlikely to succeed in the case of an offer which has been so approved unless there is evidence of fraud, bad faith, collusion or inequitable treatment of the shareholders or a breach of the relevant statutory provisions. Further, transactions similar to a merger, reconstruction and/or an amalgamation may in some circumstances be achieved through means other than these statutory provisions, such as a share capital exchange, asset acquisition or control, or through contractual arrangements of an operating business. Shareholders’ suits.Maples and Calder (Hong Kong) LLP, our Cayman Islands legal counsel, is not aware of any reported class action having been brought in a Cayman Islands court. Derivative actions have been brought in the Cay