Directors' remuneration

STOP PRESS: A new version of the UK Corporate Governance Code (UKCG Code) was issued on 22 January 2024 (2024 UKCG Code) and makes limited changes to the current version of the UKCG Code, which was issued in 2018 (2018 UKCG Code). The 2024 UKCG Code will apply to companies with accounting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2025 (with the exception of Provision 29 relating to the requirement for a board declaration in relation to internal controls, which will apply to accounting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2026). For further information, see News Analysis: UK Corporate Governance Code 2024 published—what’s changed?..

Entitlement to remuneration

When considering a director's entitlement to remuneration, it is important to note the distinction between:

  1. a director who is not also an employee of the company

  2. a director who is employed under a service contract with the company entitling the director to a salary and/or other remuneration

Directors are not automatically entitled under the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006) or otherwise to remuneration, or to reimbursement of expenses incurred, by virtue of their office as directors of

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