Item 5.07
|
Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders.
|
An Extraordinary General Meeting
of the shareholders of Pace Holdings Corp., a Cayman Islands exempted company (Pace) was held on March 1, 2017 (the Meeting). Present at the Meeting were holders of 53,101,981 shares of Paces ordinary shares in
person or by proxy, representing 94.40% of the voting power of Paces ordinary shares as of February 8, 2017, the record date for the Meeting, and constituting a quorum for the transaction of business.
The shareholders of Pace voted on the proposals listed below. Each proposal is described in more detail in the proxy statement/prospectus of
Porto Holdco B.V., a Dutch private limited liability company (besloten vennootschap met beperkte aansprakelijkheid) (Holdco) which the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC) declared effective on February 10, 2017
and is incorporated by reference in this Current Report on Form 8-K.
1. To adopt the Transaction Agreement, dated December 13, 2016,
among Pace, Playa Hotels & Resorts B.V., a Dutch private limited liability company (besloten vennootschap met beperkte aansprakelijkheid) (Playa), Holdco, and New PACE Holdings Corp., a Cayman Islands exempted company (New
Pace) (the Transaction Agreement) and approve the transactions contemplated thereby, including the business combination, the effect of which replicates the economics of a merger of Pace and Playa, and results in Holdco becoming the
ultimate parent company to New Pace and Playas direct and indirect subsidiaries (the Business Combination) (the Business Combination Proposal).
2. To approve the merger of Pace with and into New Pace, with New Pace being the surviving company in such merger (the Pace
Merger) and authorize, approve and confirm the Merger Proposal between Holdco and Playa (the Plan of Merger) (the Pace Merger Proposal).
3. To consider and vote upon, on a non-binding advisory basis, the approval of certain governance provisions contained in the Holdco Articles
of Association that are not required by Dutch law and materially affect shareholder rights:
A. The election of director candidates and
incumbent directors annually for appointment for a term ending at the end of the annual General Meeting to be held in the year following their appointment (the Holdco Articles of Association Term of Holdco Board of Directors
Proposal);
B. The requirement that a notice of a general meeting of shareholders must include items for which a written request has
been given (no later than 60 days prior to the general meeting) by one or more shareholders representing (individually or collectively) 3% or more of Holdcos issued share capital (the Holdco Articles of Association Ability to Bring
Matters for Discussion Before a General Meeting of Holdco Proposal);
C. A provision that certain parties who compete with Holdco
will be prohibited from beneficially owning ordinary shares exceeding certain percentage thresholds of the issued and outstanding ordinary shares of Holdco, as reasonably calculated by the board of directors of Holdco (the Holdco Articles of
Association Shareholding Limits for Certain Shareholders of Holdco Proposal);
2
D. The requirement that, subject to certain exceptions, the holders of at least one third of the
issued and outstanding ordinary shares of Holdcos capital, present in person or represented by proxy, will constitute a quorum at a general meeting of shareholders (the Holdco Articles of Association Quorum Required to Conduct
Business before a General Meeting of Holdco Proposal).
4. To approve the adjournment of the Meeting to a later date or dates
(i) to the extent necessary to ensure that any required supplement or amendment to the proxy statement/prospectus is provided to Pace shareholders or, if as of the time for which the Meeting is scheduled, there are insufficient Pace ordinary
shares represented (either in person or by proxy) to constitute a quorum necessary to conduct business at the Meeting, (ii) in order to solicit additional proxies from Pace shareholders in favor of the Business Combination Proposal and the Pace
Merger Proposal, or (iii) if Pace shareholders redeem an amount of class A ordinary shares such that the minimum proceeds condition to each partys obligation to consummate the Business Combination would not be satisfied (the
Adjournment Proposal).
The voting results for each of these proposals are set forth below.
1.
|
Approval of the Business Combination Proposal
|
|
|
|
|
|
For
|
|
Against
|
|
Abstain
|
52,586,239
|
|
506,627
|
|
9,115
|
Based on the votes set forth above, the shareholders adopted the Transaction Agreement and approved the
transactions contemplated thereby, including the Business Combination.
2.
|
Approval of the Pace Merger Proposal
|
|
|
|
|
|
For
|
|
Against
|
|
Abstain
|
52,586,033
|
|
506,627
|
|
9,321
|
Based on the votes set forth above, the shareholders approved the Pace Merger and authorized, approved and
confirmed the Plan of Merger.
3A.
|
Approval of Holdco Articles of Association Term of Holdco Board of Directors Proposal
|
|
|
|
|
|
For
|
|
Against
|
|
Abstain
|
52,489,671
|
|
0
|
|
612,310
|
3B.
|
Approval of Holdco Articles of Association Ability to Bring Matters for Discussion before a General Meeting of Holdco Proposal
|
|
|
|
|
|
For
|
|
Against
|
|
Abstain
|
42,242,779
|
|
10,246,892
|
|
612,310
|
3
3C.
|
Approval of Holdco Articles of Association Shareholding Limits for Certain Shareholders of Holdco Proposal
|
|
|
|
|
|
For
|
|
Against
|
|
Abstain
|
52,455,786
|
|
33,125
|
|
613,070
|
3D.
|
Approval of Holdco Articles of Association Quorum Required to Conduct Business before a General Meeting of Holdco
|
|
|
|
|
|
For
|
|
Against
|
|
Abstain
|
41,945,581
|
|
10,544,090
|
|
612,310
|
Based on the votes set forth above, the shareholders, on a non-binding advisory basis, approved certain
governance provisions contained in the Holdco Articles of Association.
4.
|
Approval of the Adjournment Proposal
|
|
|
|
|
|
For
|
|
Against
|
|
Abstain
|
50,168,190
|
|
676,481
|
|
2,257,310
|
With respect to the Adjournment Proposal, although the Adjournment Proposal would have received sufficient
votes to be approved, no motion to adjourn was made because the adjournment of the Meeting was determined not to be necessary or appropriate.