NAB completes due diligence on AXA
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9272e/9272e19e5ef8408214168b6fd78d1e73279f7e7b" alt="image"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9272e/9272e19e5ef8408214168b6fd78d1e73279f7e7b" alt="image"
One of the earliest hurdles to National Australia Bank’s (NAB’s) acquisition of AXA Asia Pacific (AXA APH) has been cleared, with NAB and AXA announcing the completion of confirmatory due diligence.
The two companies announced to the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) today that the NAB proposal, which would see it acquire AXA Asia Pacific while AXA APH divested its Asian business to its French parent, AXA SA, remained subject to a number of further hurdles, including actually reaching agreement with its parent.
It said discussions could not commence with AXA SA until the conclusion of the exclusivity agreement between AXA SA and AMP, thought to be around February 6.
“In the event agreement is reached between AXA APH, NAB and AXA SA, implementation of the NAB proposal will be subject to a number of conditions, including approval by AXA APH’s minority shareholders and certain regulatory approvals,” the ASX announcement said.
The transaction is currently subject to scrutiny by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission and AMP has indicated that it has not abandoned its strategy with respect AXA APH.
Recommended for you
Clime’s disposal of advice licensee Madison “needed to happen yesterday”, managing director Michael Baragwanath has told Money Management, as he concludes a severe cost-out period at the business.
As Viola Private Wealth continues on its growth trajectory, the wealth management firm has appointed a seasoned investment professional to be its first chief investment officer.
Financial advisers who wish to implement artificial intelligence in their practices need to undergo a change in their mindset as to how they use technology.
With United Global Capital expected to constitute a substantial portion of CSLR compensation in FY25–26, what has AFCA ruled in its determinations on the company so far?