Several minority shareholder associations have publicly endorsed the course of action, affirming the company’s right to chart its own path and to pursue the registered office relocation to the Netherlands. In backing Ferrovial’s decision, they also stressed the obligation of public authorities to oversee compliance with the law, underscoring the need for orderly governance even as strategic moves are contemplated. This stance reflects a broader expectation among minority investors that corporate decisions should be made with transparency and respect for existing shareholder interests, while authorities remain vigilant to maintain fair conduct throughout the process.
In particular, the Association of Spanish Minority Shareholders of Listed Companies (Aemec), along with the World Federation of Investors (WFI) and European Better Finance, issued statements in defense of the company’s approach. Their commentary emphasized that the protections afforded to shareholders, as owners of the company, are preserved and that the plan merits careful consideration in light of its potential implications for governance, liquidity, and strategic positioning. Their involvement signals a cross-border engagement that aims to reassure investors about the legitimacy and stability of Ferrovial’s strategy during the transition.
These organizations highlighted that the proposed move would be put to a vote at the company’s first general meeting, scheduled for 13 April, allowing shareholders to deliberate on the merits and risks of the plan. They framed the proposal as a calculated step designed to align the firm’s structure with its long-term objectives, while also signaling the importance of ensuring that shareholder voice remains central to the decision-making process, even as legal and regulatory considerations come into play.
From the international associations’ viewpoint, the cross-border merger is seen as bringing tangible benefits beyond mere corporate branding. They argued that the expanded international footprint would enhance Ferrovial’s visibility and reputation, while the move could also improve liquidity and secure financing terms that are more favorable in a context of a Netherlands domicile. They pointed to the United States as a potential market that could benefit from a stronger platform for engagement, underscoring the strategic value of accessing diverse funding channels and capital markets that align with global growth ambitions.
Both the European and international federations stressed that fundamental freedoms within the European Union should be safeguarded. They emphasized rights such as the free movement of capital and the freedom of establishment, as enshrined in EU law, arguing that any restriction would run counter to the interests of Ferrovial’s shareholders. Their analysis suggests that a well-structured cross-border operation can coexist with a robust internal market, provided the process adheres to uniform rules and robust protections for investors across member states.
Finally, the associations reminded public authorities of their duty to ensure adherence to the law and to uphold European fundamental rights. They urged regulators to recognize shareholder rights and to respect the corporate will of the company, noting that such protections are essential to maintaining trust and ensuring that governance remains accountable to those who own the business. In this light, the legal framework is viewed not as a constraint but as a framework that assures fair play and predictable outcomes for all stakeholders involved in the cross-border initiative, including minority shareholders who have a stake in the company’s long-term health. (Citations: Aemec, WFI, European Better Finance, 2024; EU fundamental rights guidance)