header-logo header-logo

10 June 2010
Issue: 7421 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Corporate excellence

Merit, diversity & transparency to transform boardrooms

FTSE 350 directors will need to be re-elected annually by shareholders under new best practice guidelines issued by the Financial Reporting Council (FRC) last week.

Changes to the Combined Code, now rebranded the UK Corporate Governance Code, include a recommendation that boards take gender diversity into account when appointing members. Companies will also have to demonstrate that recruitment to the board is based on merit against objective criteria and encouraged to improve risk management by making the board responsible for determining the extent of risk that the company is willing to take. Additionally, board chairmen will be expected to hold regular development reviews with each director and will need to pencil in external board effectiveness reviews every three years.

Speaking at NLJ’s corporate governance newscast last week, Frances Le Grys, a partner at Hogan Lovells, said the new regime reflected a general move, advocated by Sir David Walker, who is leading the inquiry into the corporate governance of banks and other financial institutions, towards “skilling up” the board and ensuring the tools for better stewardship are in place.

“In effect this means getting the right blend of people on the board, briefing and training them properly and then appraising them rigorously. The voice and confidence of non executive directors in particular should be strengthened by the new regime,” she said.

While the code is not binding, companies are required either to follow it or explain how else they are acting to promote good governance.  Lucy Fergusson, a partner at Linklaters, said during the newscast that the pressure shareholders have shown so far in supporting annual re-election rules out non compliance for the top firms: “It may be quite difficult for companies in the FTSE 350 to justify why they won’t opt for annual re-election. Some companies do this voluntarily already, and they haven’t seemed to have suffered because of it.”

Carol Shutkever, partner at Herbert Smith, who chaired the newscast, commented: “A lot of the changes in the code are just ones of tone and emphasis, but together they do amount to a significant shift in the behaviour expected of boards”.

The code applies to listed companies for financial years beginning on or after 29 June 2010.
 

Issue: 7421 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Laytons ETL—Maximilian Kraitt

Laytons ETL—Maximilian Kraitt

Commercial firm strengthens real estate disputes team with associate hire

Switalskis—three appointments

Switalskis—three appointments

Firm appoints three directors to board

Browne Jacobson—seven promotions

Browne Jacobson—seven promotions

Six promoted to partner and one to legal director across UK and Ireland offices

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll