---

Company Law Reform Bill [HL]

This probing matter has been brought to our attention by people involved in the company law world as an example of duplication, and where some easy consolidation could improve the comprehensibility of the Bill as a whole. We accept that the clause is technically necessary, but it highlights the fact that the Companies Act will continue to apply, and that the Bill does not sufficiently codify company law in one place. The opening words of Clause 288 are:"““Where by any provision of the Companies Acts””," and there seems to be no reason why the provisions mentioned in Clause 288 could not have been incorporated in the Bill. We accept and agree that the Bill team has performed a huge task in getting the Bill to this stage, and has done so for the most part with drafting that is very clear. We are just sad that there are some apparently unnecessary loose ends that could have been so easily tied up. As a point in question, the clause demonstrates what we are left with as a result of the lack of a sensible level of consolidation—that is, overcomplication where none is needed. By referring to the previous Companies Acts, the Bill can only confuse those who are not company law practitioners and—according to our representations—apparently even confuse some who are, which is at odds with the Government’s stated aim of thinking small first and making the law more comprehensible. It would be helpful if the Minister could explain why these technical matters could not have been addressed in the Bill, which would have further reduced the need for consulting past Companies Acts.