The shareholder who made the clause proposes to buy the shares of others at a certain price per share. The other shareholders will then have to either accept the offer and sell their shares, or buy the triggering shareholders` shares at the same price. Alternatively, the clause may be structured in such a way that the triggering shareholder proposes to sell its shares at a certain price per share and the other shareholders can then accept the offer or sell their shares to the triggering shareholder at the set price. Doubts as to admissibility may arise on a case-by-case basis, for example where one of the two shareholders is unable to finance a takeover bid from the outset and it is therefore necessary to avoid as far as possible the mechanism for implementing the shoot-out procedure that is detrimental to him. However, the risk of abuse of such clauses, which can occur in particular among economically unbalanced partners, should not be underestimated. This risk can at least be reduced by an appropriate contract. The multiple possibilities for variation and organisation of shoot-out clauses allow shareholders to find tailor-made solutions in the event of a conflict, but proactive and professional advice on company law should be provided. Shoot-out clauses in articles of association can be a proven and effective way to resolve blockages. The mere existence of such a clause in shareholders` contracts and articles of association creates a potential threat that can be quite disciplined if shareholders reconsider their own conflict position.