header-logo header-logo

08 April 2016 / James Mather
Issue: 7694 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Give me shelter

The new register of companies' beneficial owners won’t prevent “real owners” taking refuge, as James Mather explains

The new requirement on English companies and LLPs to hold a register of “people with significant control” (PSCs), which applies from 6 April 2016, is designed to “bring information about company ownership into the open”. Obscure company ownership structures, the government stresses, can “facilitate tax evasion, money laundering and even terrorist financing”. It hopes that the register will impede such abuses by revealing “who is behind a company””, and has trumpeted the new register in the wake of the Panama Papers affair.

With such high expectations, one would therefore have expected the new rules to make clear that offshore discretionary trust structures are a primary target. While having their legitimate uses, after all, these are also the pre-eminent vehicle for obscuring ownership from creditors, spouses, tax authorities and the like. The “real owners” behind companies held in this way are surely the discretionary beneficiaries, often the settlor and members of his family. Where such beneficiaries make a request

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll