Global business entities guides

This sub-topic contains global guides addressing essential aspects of forming specific business entities in global jurisdictions. Leading law firms in the Multilaw global law firm network answer key questions in each guide. Please note that some jurisdictions have more than one guide available, with each guide covering a different type of business entity.

Questions addressed

The following 39 questions are answered in each guide:

Common entities

1. What form of entity is the subject of this questionnaire? What other forms of entities are commonly used in this jurisdiction and are the subject of another questionnaire response?

2. Identify other types of entities in your jurisdiction that exist but will not be the subject of a questionnaire response at this time

General principles

3. What is the main source of law authorising this form of entity?

4. Give a brief summary of the form of entity

5. Can this type of entity be involved in international transactions and restructurings (eg cross border mergers, asset acquisitions and divestitures, equity acquisitions, conversions, etc)?

6. Can this type of entity be publicly listed or held, or its securities be

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