Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Hodgson of Astley Abbotts (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 20 March 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Company Law Bill [HL].


Company Law Bill [HL]

Most unusually for the noble Lord, I believe that he missed the point that I was driving at, which was not that we should dispense with subsection (6) and the additional delivery but that subsection (6) should form part of the documents that are listed under subsection (3). I sought to avoid having two filings—to move two filings into one—and to make those documents include the statement made in connection with Clause 582(4). I quite understand the noble Lord waving a big stick and using the words ““misleading””, ““false”” and ““offences””; we are not taking issue with that. We merely seek to make the operation of this provision more effective, more streamlined and, as practitioners have said, more in line with the way in which commercial reality operates. A one-step process—as opposed to a two-step process—would move subsection (6) into subsection (3) but would keep the effect the same.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
680 c45GC 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Disclosure of information Company law Company accounts Companies Business interests Finance Investment income Membership Meetings Private companies Registration Shares Shareholders
Legislation
Company Law Reform Bill (HL) 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk