Company: MHLA
Filing Date: 2025-03-26
Form Type: DEFM14A
Source: 0001104659-25-028254
Chunk: 128

Company: Maiden Holdings, Ltd.
Filing Date: 2025-03-26
Form: DEFM14A
Chunk 128
---
 negotiated and revised the draft definitive agreements to resolve all outstanding issues.

<div align='center'>80</div>

TABLE OF CONTENTS

On December 29, 2024, the Maiden board held a meeting at which Maiden management and representatives of IAP, Paul, Weiss and Appleby were in attendance. At the meeting, Mr. Haveron provided the Maiden board with an update as to the status of the transaction discussions. The Maiden board asked questions of Mr. Haveron and Mr. Lawrence F. Metz, Maiden’s Executive Vice Chairman and Group President, regarding the discussions with Kestrel and AmTrust. Representatives of Paul, Weiss then provided a summary of the material terms of the definitive agreements, including a description of the resolution of open items that had previously been discussed with the Maiden board, materials with respect to which had been provided to the Maiden board in advance of the meeting. The Maiden board asked questions of representatives of Paul, Weiss regarding the resolution of the remaining issues in the definitive agreements. Representatives of Appleby then reviewed with the Maiden board its fiduciary responsibilities under Bermuda law in connection with the potential transaction, materials with respect to which had been provided to the Maiden board in advance of the meeting. The Maiden board asked questions of representatives of Appleby regarding the duties of directors of a Bermuda company. Representatives of IAP presented their financial analyses of the potential transaction, materials with respect to which had been provided to the Maiden board in advance of the meeting. The Maiden board then asked questions of representatives of IAP regarding IAP’s financial analyses. After responding to the questions, IAP delivered its oral opinion (subsequently confirmed by delivery of a written opinion dated December 29, 2024) that, as of such date and based upon and subject to the assumptions made and qualifications and limitations to be described in its written opinion, the Kestrel merger consideration was fair, from a financial point of view, to Maiden and Maiden shareholders (see the section entitled “Opinion of Maiden’s Financial Advisor” beginning on page 85).

Mr. Metz, with the assistance of representatives of Paul, Weiss, then reviewed with the Maiden board the resolutions proposed to be adopted by the Maiden board to approve the potential transaction, a draft of which had been provided to the Maiden board in advance of the meeting. After discussion and deliberation of the proposed terms of the transaction, and taking into consideration the matters discussed during the meeting and prior meetings of the Maiden board (including the factors described in the section entitled “— Reasons