
Monday, 30 September 2013
UK: Takeover Code - new edition comes into force today

Hong Kong: SFC/SEHK joint policy statement for overseas companies seeking a listing

Friday, 27 September 2013
UK: Law Commissions publish draft Co-operative and Community Benefit Societies Bill

Canada: CSA update on proxy advisor consultation

Sri Lanka: SEC/CA Sri Lanka revised corporate governance code

UK: Insolvency Service begins Insolvency Rules 1986 consultation

Labels:
insolvency,
insolvency act 1986,
uk,
winding-up
Thursday, 26 September 2013
Japan: TSE listed companies and outside directors

British Virgin Islands: relief for unfair prejudice under the Business Companies Act 2004

Pakistan: SECP proposes changes to single member company rules

Wednesday, 25 September 2013
UK: ONS share ownership survey published

Singapore: MAS consultation paper on amendments to corporate governance regulations

Tuesday, 24 September 2013
IESBA announces change to its definition of 'those charged with governance'

Monday, 23 September 2013
New Zealand: Royal assent for Financial Markets Conduct Bill

UK: Scotland: No common law right to 'extra' interest

Labels:
partnership,
partnership act 1890,
scotland,
uk
Friday, 20 September 2013
UK: OFWAT consults on governance principles for water companies

Thursday, 19 September 2013
USA: SEC publishes pay ratio disclosure rule

Labels:
chief executive,
dodd-frank act,
pay ratio,
usa
Europe: Commission publishes proposals for benchmark supervision

Wednesday, 18 September 2013
UK: Bank of England Quarterly Bulletin

Labels:
bank of england,
prudential regulation authority,
uk
Tuesday, 17 September 2013
UK: Creating the Competition and Markets Authority - consultation on secondary legislation

UK: Competition Commission statutory audit services market - new publication date for final report

Monday, 16 September 2013
New Zealand: Law Commission proposes new Trusts Act

India: Companies Act 2013 implementation - update

BIS Quarterly Review - September 2013

Friday, 13 September 2013
Europe: Article 28 of the Short Selling Regulation should be annulled says Advocate General Jääskinen

The Advocate General has concluded, in advice that is not binding on the Court of Justice, that Article 28 should be annulled because Article 114 TFEU was not an appropriate legal basis for its adoption. A summary of the Advocate General's opinion is available here (pdf).
Europe: Banking supervision in the Eurozone - Parliament approves single supervisory mechanism

Thursday, 12 September 2013
UK: England and Wales: no implied term requiring disclosure by bank

Australia: CAMAC discussion paper on crowd sourced equity funding

Wednesday, 11 September 2013
UK: The Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 (Commencement No. 3, Transitional Provisions and Savings) Order 2013

Australia: ASIC report on hedge funds and systemic risk

FSB publishes peer assessment of the United Kingdom

Tuesday, 10 September 2013
UK: Prudential Regulation Authority - two new consultation papers published

Labels:
insurance,
pra,
prudential regulation authority,
uk
UK: The Executive Pay and Remuneration Bill

Labels:
employee,
remuneration,
remuneration committee,
shareholder,
uk
Monday, 9 September 2013
UK: Company directors, fiduciary duties and tax avoidance

India: Companies Act 2013 - consultation on first tranche of draft rules begins

UK: The Companies (Revision of Defective Accounts and Reports) (Amendment) (No.2) Regulations 2013

Labels:
accounting,
companies act 2006,
financial reporting,
uk
G20/OECD High level principles of long-term investment financing by institutional investors

UK: Financial Conduct Authority quarterly consultation

Friday, 6 September 2013
Jersey: The scope of Article 48D of the Banking Business (Jersey) Law 1991

UK: FTSE350 companies and their subsidiaries

Labels:
bis,
companies house,
dbis,
ftse,
parent company,
parent-subsidiary,
reporting,
subsidiary company,
uk
Thursday, 5 September 2013
UK: Scotland: Scottish Government programme for 2013-2014

Labels:
bankruptcy,
company contracts,
contract,
insolvency,
scotland,
uk
Europe: Risks and vulnerabilities in the EU financial system

Wednesday, 4 September 2013
UK: SFO proceedings against Olympus and subsidiary

Labels:
companies act 2006,
japan,
olympus,
subsidiary company,
uk
Europe: Commission publishes communication on shadow banking and proposals regarding money market funds

India: Companies Act 2013 published in the Gazette

Second, the Act contains provisions which in other jurisdictions are contained in corporate governance codes, including the composition of the board and the formation of audit, remuneration and nomination committees. The Act also contains, in Schedule IV, a code of professional conduct for independent directors. Third, the new framework for external auditor appointment and rotation is contained in section 139. Listed companies are not permitted to appoint (or reappoint) an audit firm for more than two terms of five consecutive years. Fourth, the duties of directors are set out in section 166, which states that "[a] director of a company shall act in good faith in order to promote the objects of the company for the benefit of its members as a whole, and in the best interests of the company, its employees, the shareholders, the community and for the protection of environment." The way in which this duty is expressed raises several questions. Is this a single duty or several? Must directors always act in the best interests of the identified stakeholders? Is this feasible where, for example, a decision may be in the best interests of the shareholders but not the employees? Update (9 September 2013) - the first tranche of draft rules have been published for consultation: see here.
UK: England and Wales: company did not have a parent company

Tuesday, 3 September 2013
UK: England and Wales: Lord Chief Justice's report published

FSB progress reports: OTC derivatives reforms and ending 'too big to fail'

Monday, 2 September 2013
UK: England and Wales: directors' power to restrict shareholder voting rights exercised for an improper purpose

The judge accepted that the directors had acted in what they believed was the best interests of the company. However, he found that they had used a power given for a limited purpose - the disclosure of information in response to the section 793 notice - for the purpose of stopping certain shareholders from voting at the annual general meeting. In doing so they breached section 171 ("Duty to act within powers"), the provisions of which were not trumped by section 172 ("Duty to promote the success of the company"). The result was that the directors' exercise of the power to impose restrictions on the shareholders' voting was set aside.
One point that was not pleaded but which the judge raised at the final speeches stage, was whether the exercise of a power should be set aside if the directors would have acted in the same way taking only proper purposes into account. Having raised this point the judge then held that it was too late for it to form part of the proceedings. He did, however, offer an opinion: in his view it was possible that a decision tainted by an improper purpose might nevertheless be upheld in such circumstances. The facts of the present case were, he noted, very different from the leading cases on improper purposes (Hogg v Cramphorn Ltd [1967] Ch 254 and Howard Smith Ltd v Ampol Ltd [1974] AC 821). Moreover, he did not see why the logic of these two cases should necessarily be applied inexorably to the present case.
India: Company law reform - Companies Bill 2012 receives presidential approval

Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)