---

Company Law Reform Bill [HL]

In opposing that Clause 679 should stand part of the Bill, I shall speak similarly to Clause 680 standing part and to Amendments Nos. A188A, A188B, A188C and A196A. We wish to ensure that matters of substance—relating, for example, to the content of the information in a given document or the particulars that are to be covered in it—are for the Secretary of State; and issues relating to the ““form, authentication and manner of delivery”” of documents—for example, what type of standard form the company should fill in, or what technical specification and security arrangements should be used if a company chooses to send the document electronically—are matters for the registrar. At the moment, the Bill, on occasions, uses the same word, ““prescribed””, to describe both types of requirement, and thus it is not always immediately clear whether it is intended that the prescription should be by the Secretary of State or by the registrar. The amendments address this to give clear effect to the policy I have just mentioned. I believe it will therefore make for a much more coherent arrangement which will be of benefit to users of the Bill. Clause 679 negatived. Clause 680 negatived.