---

Company Law Reform Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. A183:"Page 322, line 33, at beginning insert ““Subject only to subsection (5),””" The noble Lord said: This amendment seeks to clarify the relationship between Clause 662(3) and Clause 662(5). Clause 662(3) states that an EEA company, which is defined in Clause 764, may always be registered under its corporate name when stating its name for the purposes of registration as an oversea company under Clause 662(1). Some EEA states, such as Greece, do not use the Roman alphabet, so there is a tension between Clause 662(3) and Clause 662(5), which provides:"““The provisions of section 58 (permitted characters etc) apply in every case””." It would be open to the Secretary of State to require, by regulations made under Clause 58, that the Roman alphabet must be used in stating a name for registration purposes. We suggest that Clause 717 does not provide a solution to this problem. We think that Clause 662(5) is intended to override Clause 662(3), but we suggest that the matter should be put beyond doubt by the amendment. I beg to move.