(1) This section applies where shares are subject to restrictions by virtue of an order under section 794.
(2) A person commits an offence if he—
(a) exercises or purports to exercise any right—
(i) to dispose of shares that to his knowledge, are for the time being subject to restrictions, or
(ii) to dispose of any right to be issued with any such shares, or
(b) votes in respect of any such shares (whether as holder or proxy), or appoints a proxy to vote in respect of them, or
(c) being the holder of any
**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
Qualified one-way costs shifting (QOCS)What is QOCS?Qualified one-way costs shifting (QOCS) was introduced on 1 April 2013 as part of the Jackson costs reforms following the removal of a claimant’s right to recover additional liabilities from the defendant, ie success fees and after the event (ATE)
Unlike many other countries, the UK has no unfair competition law. Brand owners seeking to prevent competitors from marketing ‘copycat’ products or using misleading advertising have to rely on a combination of different intellectual property rights. These rights include the common law right to
The supremacy of EU lawIP COMPLETION DAY: 11pm (GMT) on 31 December 2020 marks the end of the Brexit transition/implementation period entered into following the UK’s withdrawal from the EU. At this point in time (referred to in UK law as ‘IP completion day’), key transitional arrangements come to an
Standard of care in professional negligence claimsThis Practice Note considers the standard of care in professional negligence claims, originally formulated in Bolam v Friern Hospital as being that of reasonable skill and care but now reconsidered following Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health. It
0330 161 1234