Shareholders in the United Kingdom

Last updated

The London Stock Exchange at Paternoster Square. Paternoster Square.jpg
The London Stock Exchange at Paternoster Square.

Shareholders in the United Kingdom are people and organisations who buy shares in UK companies. In large companies, such as those on the FTSE100, shareholders are overwhelmingly large institutional investors, such as pension funds, insurance companies, mutual funds or similar foreign organisations. UK shareholders have the most favourable set of rights in the world in their ability to control directors of corporations.[ neutrality is disputed ] UK company law gives shareholders the ability to,

Contents

Shareholders also owe one another duties, and owe duties under the Stewardship Code to exercise their voting power.

Types of shareholder

Individuals

Pension funds

Largest private UK pension funds
Largest public service UK pension funds

Insurance funds

Mutual investment funds

Foreign investors

Shareholder rights

Shareholders provide an essential source of capital investment to corporations, and because of the bargaining position this confers, shareholders typically gain a comprehensive set of governance rights under a constitution. While not technically required, shareholders invariably possess exclusive voting rights, in contrast to many other European jurisdictions which require that employees codetermine (i.e. have the right to elect some of) the members of the board. [1] In this way, and also because of the additional mandatory rights shareholders enjoy under the Companies Act 2006, the UK is a "shareholder friendly" jurisdiction relative to its European and American counterparts.

Elections

Since the Report of the Committee on Company Law Amendment , chaired in 1945 by Lord Cohen, led to the Companies Act 1947, as voters in the general meeting of public companies, [2] shareholders have the mandatory right to remove directors by a simple majority, now under CA 2006 section 168. [3]

By comparison, in Germany, [4] and in most American companies (predominantly incorporated in Delaware) directors can only be removed for a "good reason". [5]

Constitution

Shareholders will habitually have the right to change the company's constitution with a three quarter majority vote, unless they have chosen to entrench the constitution with a higher threshold. [6]

Meetings and resolutions

Shareholders with support of 5 per cent of the total vote can call meetings, [7] and can circulate suggestions for resolutions with support of 5 per cent of the total vote, or any one hundred other shareholders holding over £100 in shares each. [8]

Executive pay

Shareholder have say on pay of directors under CA 2006 section 439. For the time being, this is non-binding.

Significant transactions

Categories of important decisions, such as large asset sales, [9] approval of mergers, takeovers, winding up of the company, any expenditure on political donations, [10] and share buybacks. Other transactions where directors have a conflict of interest that require binding approval of shareholders are ratification of corporate opportunities, large self dealing transactions and service contracts lasting over two years.

Companies cannot make political donations without approval of the general meeting.

Classes of shares

It is possible for companies to create different classes of shares to provide different groups of shareholders with different shareholder rights. For example, different shareholder rights could be given to different groups of shareholders such as founders, investors and employees. The shareholders rights capable of variation include: dividend rights, voting tights and capital rights. Capital rights are the right to receive capital following a sale of the company, liquidation or upon an asset sale.  It is common to see different rights for different shareholders and preferences.

Shareholder duties

Activism

Despite habitually occupying the most privileged position in UK corporate governance, shareholders in large public companies listed on the London Stock Exchange infrequently exercise their governance rights. Institutional investors, including pension funds, mutual funds and insurance funds, own most shares. Thousands or perhaps millions of persons, particularly through pensions, are beneficiaries from the returns on shares. Historically institutions have often not voted or participated in general meetings on their beneficiaries' behalf, and often display an uncritical pattern of supporting management. However, institutional investors also often work "behind the scenes" to secure better corporate governance for their members, through informal but direct communication with management. [12] Individual shareholders form an increasingly small part of total investments, while foreign investment and institutional investor ownership have grown their share steadily over the last forty years. Institutional investors, who deal with other peoples' money, are bound by fiduciary obligations, deriving from the law of trusts and obligations to exercise care deriving from the common law. Now the Stewardship Code 2010, drafted by the Financial Reporting Council (the corporate governance watchdog), reinforces the duty on institutions to actively engage in governance affairs by disclosing their voting policy, voting record and voting. The aim is to make directors more accountable, at least, to investors of capital.

See also

Notes

  1. e.g. in Germany, the Mitbestimmungsgesetz 1976 (Codetermination Act 1976)
  2. In closely held, private companies, the mandatory removal right in CA 2006 s 168 is qualified by the majority House of Lords decision in Bushell v Faith [1970] AC 1099, holding that a company's articles could allow a shareholder's votes to triple if facing removal as a director. This followed the Cohen Report's recommendations.
  3. Previously Companies Act 1985, section 303, implemented in the Companies Act 1947, following recommendations of the Cohen Committee, Report of the Committee on Company Law Amendment (1945) Cmd 6659. See EM Dodd, 'The Cohen Report' (1945) 58 Harvard Law Review 1258
  4. See Aktiengesetz 1965 §76. This is the Vorstand, or the "executive" of the company that carries out all functions of management, rather than the Aufsichtsrat or supervisory council, which appoints it and is in turn elected by shareholders and employees.
  5. See Delaware General Corporation Law s 141(k) and Campbell v. Loews, Inc 134 A.2d 852 (1957); for a comprehensive critique, see AA Berle and GC Means, The Modern Corporation and Private Property (1932)
  6. CA 2006 s 283 (special resolution definition), ss 21–22 (amending the constitution)
  7. CA 2006 s 303, as amended by Companies (Shareholders' Rights) Regulations 2009/1632 Pt 2, reg 4
  8. CA 2006 ss 304–305
  9. UKLA Listing Rule 10.
  10. CA 2006 ss 366–368 and 378 require a resolution, itemising the money to be donated, be passed by shareholders for any political contributions over £5000 in 12 months, lasting a maximum of four years.
  11. cf Gambotto v WCP Ltd (1995) 127 ALR 417
  12. See BS Black and JC Coffee, 'Hail Britannia?: Institutional Investor Behavior Under Limited Regulation' (1994) 92 Michigan Law Review 1997–2087

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Board of directors</span> Type of governing body for an organisation

A board of directors is an executive committee that jointly supervises the activities of an organization, which can be either a for-profit or a nonprofit organization such as a business, nonprofit organization, or a government agency.

Corporate governance is defined, described or delineated in diverse ways, depending on the writer's purpose. Writers focused on a disciplinary interest or context often adopt narrow definitions that appear purpose-specific. Writers concerned with regulatory policy in relation to corporate governance practices often use broader structural descriptions. A broad (meta) definition that encompasses many adopted definitions is "Corporate governance” describes the processes, structures, and mechanisms that influence the control and direction of corporations."

An activist shareholder is a shareholder who uses an equity stake in a corporation to put pressure on its management. A fairly small stake may be enough to launch a successful campaign. In comparison, a full takeover bid is a much more costly and difficult undertaking. The goals of activist shareholders range from financial to non-financial. Shareholder activists can address self-dealing by corporate insiders, although large stockholders can also engage in self-dealing to themselves at the expense of smaller minority shareholders.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Corporate law</span> Body of law that governs businesses

Corporate law is the body of law governing the rights, relations, and conduct of persons, companies, organizations and businesses. The term refers to the legal practice of law relating to corporations, or to the theory of corporations. Corporate law often describes the law relating to matters which derive directly from the life-cycle of a corporation. It thus encompasses the formation, funding, governance, and death of a corporation.

An institutional investor is an entity which pools money to purchase securities, real property, and other investment assets or originate loans. Institutional investors include commercial banks, central banks, credit unions, government-linked companies, insurers, pension funds, sovereign wealth funds, charities, hedge funds, REITs, investment advisors, endowments, and mutual funds. Operating companies which invest excess capital in these types of assets may also be included in the term. Activist institutional investors may also influence corporate governance by exercising voting rights in their investments. In 2019, the world's top 500 asset managers collectively managed $104.4 trillion in Assets under Management (AuM).

A proxy statement is a statement required of a firm when soliciting shareholder votes. This statement is filed in advance of the annual meeting. The firm needs to file a proxy statement, otherwise known as a Form DEF 14A, with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. This statement is useful in assessing how management is paid and potential conflict of interest issues with auditors.

An open-ended investment company or investment company with variable capital is a type of open-ended collective investment formed as a corporation under the Open-Ended Investment Company Regulations 2001 in the United Kingdom. The terms "OEIC" and "ICVC" are used interchangeably with different investment managers favouring one over the other. In the UK OEICs are the preferred legal form of new open-ended investment over the older unit trust.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Companies Act 2006</span> British statute

The Companies Act 2006 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which forms the primary source of UK company law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United Kingdom company law</span> Law that regulates corporations formed under the Companies Act 2006

The United Kingdom company law regulates corporations formed under the Companies Act 2006. Also governed by the Insolvency Act 1986, the UK Corporate Governance Code, European Union Directives and court cases, the company is the primary legal vehicle to organise and run business. Tracing their modern history to the late Industrial Revolution, public companies now employ more people and generate more of wealth in the United Kingdom economy than any other form of organisation. The United Kingdom was the first country to draft modern corporation statutes, where through a simple registration procedure any investors could incorporate, limit liability to their commercial creditors in the event of business insolvency, and where management was delegated to a centralised board of directors. An influential model within Europe, the Commonwealth and as an international standard setter, UK law has always given people broad freedom to design the internal company rules, so long as the mandatory minimum rights of investors under its legislation are complied with.

Say on pay is a term used for a role in corporate law whereby a firm's shareholders have the right to vote on the remuneration of executives.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United Kingdom enterprise law</span>

United Kingdom enterprise law concerns the ownership and regulation of organisations producing goods and services in the UK, European and international economy. Private enterprises are usually incorporated under the Companies Act 2006, regulated by company law, competition law, and insolvency law, while almost one third of the workforce and half of the UK economy is in enterprises subject to special regulation. Enterprise law mediates the rights and duties of investors, workers, consumers and the public to ensure efficient production, and deliver services that UK and international law sees as universal human rights. Labour, company, competition and insolvency law create general rights for stakeholders, and set a basic framework for enterprise governance, but rules of governance, competition and insolvency are altered in specific enterprises to uphold the public interest, as well as civil and social rights. Universities and schools have traditionally been publicly established, and socially regulated, to ensure universal education. The National Health Service was set up in 1946 to provide everyone with free health care, regardless of class or income, paid for by progressive taxation. The UK government controls monetary policy and regulates private banking through the publicly owned Bank of England, to complement its fiscal policy. Taxation and spending composes nearly half of total economic activity, but this has diminished since 1979.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Australian corporate law</span>

Australian corporations law has historically borrowed heavily from UK company law. Its legal structure now consists of a single, national statute, the Corporations Act 2001. The statute is administered by a single national regulatory authority, the Australian Securities & Investments Commission (ASIC).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States corporate law</span> Overview of United States corporate law

United States corporate law regulates the governance, finance and power of corporations in US law. Every state and territory has its own basic corporate code, while federal law creates minimum standards for trade in company shares and governance rights, found mostly in the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended by laws like the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002 and the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. The US Constitution was interpreted by the US Supreme Court to allow corporations to incorporate in the state of their choice, regardless of where their headquarters are. Over the 20th century, most major corporations incorporated under the Delaware General Corporation Law, which offered lower corporate taxes, fewer shareholder rights against directors, and developed a specialized court and legal profession. Nevada has done the same. Twenty-four states follow the Model Business Corporation Act, while New York and California are important due to their size.

United Kingdom banking law refers to banking law in the United Kingdom, to control the activities of banks.

<i>Bishopsgate Investment Management Ltd v Maxwell (No 2)</i>

Bishopsgate Investment Management Ltd v Maxwell [1993] BCLC 814 is a UK company law case concerning a director's duty to act for proper purposes of the company. This case is an example of what would now be Companies Act 2006, section 171.

ShareAction is a registered charity that promotes Responsible Investment.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Corporate law in Vietnam</span>

Corporate law in Vietnam was originally based on the French commercial law system. However, since Vietnam's independence in 1945, it has largely been influenced by the ruling Communist Party. Currently, the main sources of corporate law are the Law on Enterprises, the Law on Securities and the Law on Investment.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Canadian corporate law</span>

Canadian corporate law concerns the operation of corporations in Canada, which can be established under either federal or provincial authority.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">British Virgin Islands company law</span>

The British Virgin Islands company law is the law that governs businesses registered in the British Virgin Islands. It is primarily codified through the BVI Business Companies Act, 2004, and to a lesser extent by the Insolvency Act, 2003 and by the Securities and Investment Business Act, 2010. The British Virgin Islands has approximately 30 registered companies per head of population, which is likely the highest ratio of any country in the world. Annual company registration fees provide a significant part of Government revenue in the British Virgin Islands, which accounts for the comparative lack of other taxation. This might explain why company law forms a much more prominent part of the law of the British Virgin Islands when compared to countries of similar size.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">European company law</span>

European company law is a part of European Union law, which concerns the formation, operation and insolvency of companies in the European Union. The EU creates minimum standards for companies throughout the EU, and has its own corporate forms. All member states continue to operate separate companies acts, which are amended from time to time to comply with EU Directives and Regulations. There is, however, also the option of businesses to incorporate as a Societas Europaea (SE), which allows a company to operate across all member states.

References