Disclosure of beneficial ownership

This overview is a guide to the Corporate content within the Disclosure of beneficial ownership subtopic, with links to the appropriate materials. It covers key aspects of the overseas entities register and the people with significant control (PSC) regime based on the latest regulations and guidance.

The register of overseas entities that own UK property

Following the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the UK Government accelerated the passing of the Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Act 2022 (EC(TE)A 2022). EC(TE)A 2022 requires overseas entities to register with, and provide details of their beneficial owners to, UK Companies House before the overseas entity can be registered as the legal owner of UK land. EC(TE)A 2022 is largely based on the previous draft Registration of Overseas Entities Bill.

Being introduced alongside plans to reform and better resource Companies House and to increase the transparency of UK corporate entities (see Corporate transparency and register reform in Practice Note: Companies House filing procedures), the intention is to immediately dissuade those planning to buy UK property with illicit funds as well as to increase transparency and public trust in overseas

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Corporate News

High Court clarifies position of sole directors under Model Articles and the interaction between UK sanctions regulations and in-court appointment of administrators (Re KRF Services (UK) Ltd and others)

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: This High Court case (which addresses two important issues in UK company law and sanctions regulations) will be of interest to insolvency practitioners, corporate and restructuring lawyers, sanctions lawyers, and businesses and individuals which are affected by sanctions. Firstly, it clarifies the position of sole directors under the Model Articles for private limited companies. The court ruled that a sole director can validly pass board resolutions and bind the company, regardless of whether they have always been the sole director or were previously part of a multi-member board. This interpretation resolves conflicts between Article 7(2) and Article 11(2) of the Model Articles, with the court favouring Article 7(2)'s provisions. Secondly, the case examines the interaction between UK sanctions regulations and the in-court appointment of administrators. The court determined that making an administration application and order does not breach asset-freezing sanctions, even when the company is designated or controlled by a sanctioned person. While an Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) license is typically required for administrators to act, the court retains discretion to make immediate appointments in urgent situations. Written by Joshua Ray and Duncan Henderson, partners at CANDEY, which acted for the First and Second Applicants on this matter.

View Corporate by content type :

Popular documents