header-logo header-logo

09 December 2010 / Jane Mayfield
Issue: 7445 / Categories: Features , LexisPSL
printer mail-detail

Good governance

In the first of two articles, Jane Mayfield considers the rationale behind the IoD’s new corporate governance framework

The Institute of Directors (IoD) issued its guidance on corporate governance, Corporate Governance Guidance and Principles for Unlisted Companies in the UK, last month. The guidance is based on the document published by the European Confederation of Directors’ Association in March, Corporate Governance Guidance and Principles for Unlisted Companies in Europe. 
Aimed at directors, shareholders and stakeholders of unlisted UK companies the guidance provides the IoD’s rationale and reasons for establishing an effective corporate governance framework in an unlisted company (Part One) and 14 governance principles (Part Two).

The rationale for the guidance

Historically corporate governance codes in the UK have focused on listed companies. With increasing media and public attention in this area over the last few years, and the economic importance of unlisted companies, the IoD has published a set of voluntary corporate governance principles outlining best practice for unlisted companies. The guidance focuses on limited companies that are not listed or quoted on a public

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

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll