---

Company Law Reform Bill [HL]

Amendments Nos. A227 and A228 would restrict the coverage of the Bill’s controls over business names. At present, the legislation relating to company names is split between the Companies Act 1985 and the Business Names Act 1985. The interface between these Acts is imperfect: there are both overlaps and gaps in the coverage, and the Bill addresses this problem. Accordingly, Clause 789 brings all companies within the coverage of the coverage of the controls. It therefore also applies to any partnerships whose partners include corporate bodies. Amendments Nos. A229 and A230 are not necessary. Both forenames and initials are permitted additions and there is no limit on the number of permitted additions. Turning to Amendment No. A231, there has never been any suggestion that the inclusion of ““and”” in a partnership’s trading name would bring it within the coverage of the controls over business names. In this context, ““and”” seems more akin to punctuation than to a part of the name. With regard to other conjunctions, I do not consider that a name comprising two surnames linked by, for example, ““because””, ““for”” or ““or””, should be exempt from the requirement for prior approval if the name includes a sensitive word or implies a connection with government. In view of this explanation, I hope that the noble Lord will agree to withdraw his amendment.