(1) A limited company having a share capital may reduce its share capital—
(a) in the case of a private company limited by shares, by special resolution supported by a solvency statement (see sections 642 to 644);
(b) in any case, by special resolution confirmed by the court (see sections 645 to 651).
(2) A company may not reduce its capital under subsection (1)(a) if as a result of the reduction there would no longer be any member of the company holding shares other than redeemable shares.
[(2A) A company may not reduce its share capital under subsection (1)(a) or (b) as part of a scheme by virtue of which a person, or a person together with its associates, is to acquire all the
**Trials are provided to all LexisPSL and LexisLibrary content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these LexisPSL services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial.
Existing user? Sign-in
Take a free trial
Broadly, the doctrine of overreaching enables purchasers (which includes tenants and mortgagees) in good faith for money or money’s worth to rely solely on the legal title. In the case of registered land, this means the entries entered on the register of title, as it records ownership of the legal
Millett LJ subdivided types of constructive trust into two categories, distinguishing between:•the constructive trust proper, where equity intervenes to prevent the legal owner from unconscionably denying the beneficial interest of another (known as the institutional constructive trust)•the
When restructuring is considered rather than formal insolvency proceedings (see Practice Note: Benefits of restructuring over formal proceedings) the company may want to ensure that relevant creditors quickly enter a standstill agreement to gain some breathing space to consider a restructuring
This Practice Note considers the doctrine of forum non conveniens, also referred to as the appropriate forum or the proper place for a dispute to be determined. This doctrine is of relevance when determining whether the courts of England and Wales have jurisdiction to hear a dispute and is applied
0330 161 1234
To view the latest version of this document and millions of others like it, sign-in to LexisLibrary or register for a free trial.