header-logo header-logo

03 February 2012 / David Greene
Issue: 7499 / Categories: Opinion , Company
printer mail-detail

In good company?

What does the future hold for shareholder democracy, asks David Greene

The hot topic of the week is the control that shareholders have over executives’ remuneration and bonuses. Vince Cable has joined the throng with fresh proposals for change. The idea, however, that increasing shareholders’ control over this aspect of the relationship between their company and its senior employees will serve some wider social good is illusory, notwithstanding politicians’ declarations to the contrary. If they want to achieve control of executive conduct by shareholders, the way in which that relationship works would have to shift radically. In any event, are shareholders willing, able, or indeed the right people, to exert such control?

Primary responsibility

Directors’ primary responsibility is to the company with which they have contractual and other obligations. Their additional common law duties to the company are set out in the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006) at ss 170–181. Much was made of these new provisions, but commentators recognise that they merely repeat what was previously enforceable at common law.

Some

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

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
back-to-top-scroll