The announcement by Sun Pharma on 6th April, 2014 that it would acquire 100% of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. In an all-stock transaction, valued at $4 billion, marked one of the landmark deals of Indian Pharmaceutical industry which resulted in making Sun Pharma the largest pharmaceutical company in India, the largest Indian Pharma company in the US and the 5th largest generic company worldwide.
One of the major controversies was related to the ability of Ranbaxy to stay out of trouble. In 2009 the US Food and Drug Administration said it halted reviews of all drug applications including data developed at Ranbaxy's Paonta Sahib Plant in India because of a practice of falsified data and test results in approved and pending drug applications. In …show more content…
According to CCI, there were seven brands which would have to be sold off else the merger would be classified as a violation of the competition laws.
CCI said both the companies have to divest assets in the following drug areas to stop creating monopoly — Tamsulosin & Tolterodine (Sun to divest brand Tamlet), Rosuvasatin & Ezetimibe (Ranbaxy to divest brand Rosuvas EZ), Leuprorelin (Ranbaxy to divest brand Eligard). If the divestment did not happen within the first divesture period, Sun would then have to divest its other brands. Sun and Ranbaxy finally got approval from the Competition Commission for sale of seven brands to Emcure Pharma to comply with the fair trade watchdog's conditional nod for their USD 4-billion merger.
Another controversy was related to alleged insider trading in the deal. On April 30, 2014, the Andhra Pradesh High Court had ordered an interim status quo on the $4-billion deal between Sun Pharma and Ranbaxy Laboratories. The petitioners alleged that there were high-volume transactions in shares and increase in stock price three days before announcement of the proposed merger on 6 April, 2014, due to which they sought action against Sun Pharma and its wholly-owned arm Silverstreet Developers LLP. According to them, the fact that Ranbaxy share price rose 24% between April 2nd and April 4th on 5 times the daily average volume traded, whereas the deal was announced …show more content…
It now has 47 manufacturing facilities across 5 continents. The transaction combines Sun Pharma’s proven complex product capabilities with Ranbaxy’s global presence, leading to significant opportunities for value creation. Additionally, the combined entity has increased exposure to emerging economies while it also improved Sun Pharma’s commercial and manufacturing presence in the United States and India. It has an established presence in key high-growth emerging markets. In India, the medicines it makes are ranked No. 1 by prescriptions amongst 13 different classes of specialist
One of the major controversies was related to the ability of Ranbaxy to stay out of trouble. In 2009 the US Food and Drug Administration said it halted reviews of all drug applications including data developed at Ranbaxy's Paonta Sahib Plant in India because of a practice of falsified data and test results in approved and pending drug applications. In …show more content…
According to CCI, there were seven brands which would have to be sold off else the merger would be classified as a violation of the competition laws.
CCI said both the companies have to divest assets in the following drug areas to stop creating monopoly — Tamsulosin & Tolterodine (Sun to divest brand Tamlet), Rosuvasatin & Ezetimibe (Ranbaxy to divest brand Rosuvas EZ), Leuprorelin (Ranbaxy to divest brand Eligard). If the divestment did not happen within the first divesture period, Sun would then have to divest its other brands. Sun and Ranbaxy finally got approval from the Competition Commission for sale of seven brands to Emcure Pharma to comply with the fair trade watchdog's conditional nod for their USD 4-billion merger.
Another controversy was related to alleged insider trading in the deal. On April 30, 2014, the Andhra Pradesh High Court had ordered an interim status quo on the $4-billion deal between Sun Pharma and Ranbaxy Laboratories. The petitioners alleged that there were high-volume transactions in shares and increase in stock price three days before announcement of the proposed merger on 6 April, 2014, due to which they sought action against Sun Pharma and its wholly-owned arm Silverstreet Developers LLP. According to them, the fact that Ranbaxy share price rose 24% between April 2nd and April 4th on 5 times the daily average volume traded, whereas the deal was announced …show more content…
It now has 47 manufacturing facilities across 5 continents. The transaction combines Sun Pharma’s proven complex product capabilities with Ranbaxy’s global presence, leading to significant opportunities for value creation. Additionally, the combined entity has increased exposure to emerging economies while it also improved Sun Pharma’s commercial and manufacturing presence in the United States and India. It has an established presence in key high-growth emerging markets. In India, the medicines it makes are ranked No. 1 by prescriptions amongst 13 different classes of specialist