Is this really unprecedented?

Look up Canadian Tire coattail provision. Report on Business, I am sure, covered the story extensively in the 1980's. I understand that Canadian Tire's non-voting shares become voting in the event of a change of control. And I believe it was a judge who imposed that rule but I don't know the details and whether the court ruling has ANY relevance here. I suspect Sprott has researched this. The coattail is also described in Canadian Tire's financials at note 25. BUT the rule only applies if someone tries to pay more for the voting shares than the non-voting. Still the court ruling was about the protection of non-voting interests so may be relevant?