Proceeding contribution from Lord McKenzie of Luton (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 28 March 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Company Law Reform Bill [HL].
Company Law Reform Bill [HL]
Clause 660 defines ““oversea company”” as meaning a company incorporated outside the UK. The definition of ““company”” in Clause 1 does not apply in this context. The contrast between ““company”” as defined in Clause 1(1) and companies incorporated outside the UK can be read in subsection (3). The present definition of ““oversea company”” contained in Section 744 of the Companies Act 1985 refers to companies, not bodies corporate. Therefore, in this regard, the drafting of Clause 660 is consistent with the approach of the current law. We are not convinced that there is justification for departing from this by what would amount to a widening of the definition as proposed in the amendment. I hope the noble Lord will not press the matter.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 680 c337GC
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords Grand Committee
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Appeals Accountancy Company law Companies Directors Finance EU law Foreign companies Registration Shares Reform Shareholders Takeovers Takeover Panel
- Legislation
- Company Law Reform Bill (HL) 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-22 02:30:12 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_313116
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_313116
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_313116