Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Goldsmith (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 6 February 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Company Law Reform Bill [HL].


Company Law Reform Bill [HL]

If only. If the company can see only dimly what the nature of its future business relationship with its suppliers will be, it will be rather hard for the directors to take it into account. They must do so only so far as is reasonably practicable. But having said that, and after the sort of example that the noble Lord gave, I should have thought that the directors would say, ““We aim to be this sort of company and the consequence of that is that we are likely to have this sort of relationship with a number of suppliers. We can’t identify specifically what they are, so when we are making our decisions, it is something to which we need to have regard.”” It is not and cannot be an absolute duty, and the noble Lord is right to point out one of the circumstances in which it cannot be—but that is not a reason for not including it as part of the enlightened shareholder value approach. I hope that I have answered all the questions that were put to me and explained to the satisfaction of noble Lords why we have chosen this way in which to define the starting point for the duty.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
678 c256-7GC 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Codes of practice Company law Companies Directors Civil proceedings Conduct Finance Liability Management Taxation Shareholders Transfer pricing
Legislation
Company Law Reform Bill (HL) 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk