Skip to main content

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]

As the noble Lord may have noticed—and as we will debate shortly—the next item on the Marshalled List is that the Government propose that Clause 679 should not stand part of the Bill. We do not intend to reinstate subsection (2) of that clause. I agree with the principle behind the noble Lord’s amendment—namely, that it is generally sensible for transitional issues to be covered by transitional regulations rather than set out on the face of the Bill—and if we were not proposing to delete the entire clause I would be happy to accept it. However, in the circumstances, I ask the noble Lord to withdraw it.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
680 c346GC 
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