Coronavirus (COVID-19)

This overview summarises the Practice Notes, news, analysis and other resources concerning the issues that may have arisen for Corporate practitioners during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. It has been archived and is not maintained. It states the law and market practice as developments took place during the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and is for background information only.

Key issues for corporate lawyers

For details on the key issues that the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic raises for corporate lawyers, see Practice Note: Coronavirus (COVID-19)—key issues for Corporate lawyers.

General meetings and AGMs

The coronavirus outbreak raised immediate legal and practical issues for companies holding their annual general meeting (AGM) while social distancing restrictions were in place, and this led to the evolution of common market practice in terms of the format of AGMs. For details, see Practice Note: Holding entirely virtual or hybrid general meetings and AGMs.

The Chartered Governance Institute (CGI), in conjunction with other city professionals, issued guidance for companies planning their AGM in light of the coronavirus crisis and the ‘stay at home measures’ announced by the government. Options discussed in the guidance include

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 applicants on this matter.

View Corporate by content type :

Popular documents