UK: Execution of deeds by companies

Last Updated: 15 November 2005
Article by Simon Howley and Gary Green

The Regulatory Reform (Execution of Deeds and Documents) Order 2005 (SI 2005/1906), which recently came into effect in England and Wales, implements proposals originally described as aiming to increase the efficiency of business transactions and remove any doubts that may exist about the law.

As highlighted in a number of consultations in the last ten years, the law has developed by accretion, building on common law principles and spread over various Acts and statutory instruments.

Discrepancies between statutory provisions have until now meant that - for companies particularly - different methods of execution could have significantly different legal consequences.

For an article explaining the new changes and highlighting some of the practical ramifications, please see below:

Full Article


"Who did this more than bloody deed?" asks someone in Macbeth: a sentiment echoed by lawyers who discover – sometimes too late – that the way a document has been executed means that it is not a deed after all.

Deeds are used to pass or confirm the passing of an interest, property or a right, or to create or confirm the creation of a binding obligation. Sometimes a deed is used so that an obligation will be binding despite the absence of consideration for it, or in order to extend the limitation period to 12 years. They are often highly important documents, and in some cases nothing less than a deed will do: for example, a power of attorney, or the transfer or creation of a legal estate in land (such as a lease) or the creation of a legal mortgage. In a takeover bid, an offeror seeking irrevocable undertakings to accept will normally take them by way of deed because otherwise (unless they are instead given in consideration only of its promise to make the offer) the offeror will not be able to count the relevant shares towards the 90% acceptances which will give it compulsory acquisition rights over the remaining offerees' shares. Getting it wrong can be disastrous.

The possibility of making a mistake stems largely from the fact that deeds require more formality than other legal documents: for example, a deed is not effective until it has been delivered – not physically, necessarily, but the person who has executed it must in addition show that he intends to be bound. This is not always well understood and can cause difficulties: some commentators, including the Law Society, have suggested that the doctrine of delivery should be abolished.

The Regulatory Reform (Execution of Deeds and Documents) Order 2005 (SI 2005/1906), which recently came into effect in England and Wales, implements proposals originally described as aiming to increase the efficiency of business transactions and remove any doubts that may exist about the law. The last major reform in this area happened 15 years ago - among other things, permitting individuals and Companies Act companies to execute deeds without using seals. These changes were intended to modernise the law and reduce inconvenience. Unfortunately, the law has developed by accretion, building on common law principles and spread over various Acts and statutory instruments. As highlighted in a number of consultations in the last ten years, discrepancies between statutory provisions meant that - for companies particularly - different methods of execution could have significantly different legal consequences.

The legislation is not concerned exclusively with deeds – in fact, one of the changes to section 74 of the Law of Property Act is to broaden its application beyond deeds to other "instruments" – but in practice the problems associated with execution of documents by companies have not arisen in relation to documents executed under hand, where it is normally a matter of authorising an individual to sign on behalf of the company (perhaps producing a copy of the board minutes to the other side), no attestation of the signature is needed and the doctrine of delivery does not apply.

The main provisions for companies

The main statutory provisions for execution of deeds by companies are:

  • section 36A of the Companies Act 1985 – which applies principally to companies incorporated under the Act and its predecessors – as augmented by the new section 36AA. These sections cover execution under the company's common seal, but also permit the company (whether it has a seal or not) to execute deeds by the signature of two directors or one director and the secretary. This has become the prevalent method for execution of deeds by companies;
  • section 74 of the Law Property Act 1925, as augmented by the new section 74A, which applies to corporations aggregate (a category that includes companies covered by section 36A but extends also to other bodies corporate, such as local authorities and building societies). Except where execution is under power of attorney, the section applies only when the corporation's seal is used; and
  • the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989, which sets out the prerequisite features of deeds for individuals and companies alike.

Compliance with section 74 or section 36A means that the person taking the benefit of the deed potentially has two important statutory protections: if he is a purchaser in good faith for valuable consideration (which includes a lessee, mortgagee or other person acquiring an interest in property – including personal property and choses in action, such as contractual rights - for valuable consideration) he can presume that the document has been duly executed by the company or corporation, without having to concern himself as to whether its constitution and internal regulations have been complied with; and, even if he is not a purchaser, he is protected by a presumption that the deed has been delivered on its being executed (which is discussed in more detail below). These two factors – due execution and delivery – make the document a deed in accordance with the 1989 Act.

Since the legislative changes in 1990, many smaller companies have dispensed with seals altogether. There is an administrative advantage in having a common seal, however, because most companies' articles of association (reflecting equivalent provisions in Table A) permit the directors to resolve that sealing can be attested by someone who is neither a director nor the secretary. The boards of large companies that often have to execute deeds – for example, banks and insurance companies - typically give standing authority to specified employees (usually referred to as authorised sealing officers) so that one, or possibly two, of them can seal and sign deeds up to a certain level of significance on behalf of the company. But this does not confer the same statutory presumption of due execution on a purchaser as if sealing were witnessed in accordance with section 74 or the deed were signed in accordance with section 36A.


Section 74 used to provide that a corporation could execute a document by affixing its seal in the presence of one director (or member of the equivalent governing body) and the clerk, secretary or other permanent officer or his deputy. Under the new Order, a corporation can also now execute in accordance with the section by affixing the seal in the presence of two directors (or members of the equivalent governing body). For the purposes of section 36A of the Companies Act, of course, signature by two directors was always enough. In fact, the amendment means that section 74, while it still requires use of the seal, is otherwise more flexible than section 36A, because it is generally thought (by the Law Commission, among others) that signature by one director and a deputy secretary (or an assistant secretary) is not effective execution under section 36A.

The Order introduces clarifying amendments:

  • into both sections that, where the relevant officer is itself a company or corporation, it should sign by the hand of an individual authorised to do so as a matter of its own internal organisation. In other words, for a corporate director to attest the affixing of a seal or to sign in accordance with section 36A, it should merely authorise an individual to sign on its behalf – there is no need to do what it would have to do if it were entering into the deed as principal rather than merely executing the deed as an officer of another company.
  • into section 36A that, where more than one company is entering into the deed without using the seal but each of them has the same officers, the officers must sign the deed separately for each of the companies. There is no corresponding provision in section 74 – presumably because that requires the use of each corporation's seal. Where seals are used, there is nothing expressly preventing officers in common from signing in attestation once only in relation to all the companies, but this is likely to be considered unorthodox.


How can the person taking the benefit of the deed be sure that it has been delivered?

Section 74 was originally silent as to delivery (and the Court of Appeal ruled that there was no implied presumption of delivery on execution). Section 36A, in contrast, provided that there was a rebuttable presumption of delivery on execution, unless the deed was in favour of a purchaser, in which case the presumption was irrebuttable. It was unclear whether the irrebuttable presumption applied if the company used its seal but the deed was signed in attestation by two directors or a director and the secretary (according to one case, it did).

The inflexibility of the irrebuttable presumption caused difficulties, particularly in the context of transactions. For example:

  • a deed will often be executed in advance as a matter of practical necessity or convenience: some parties to the deed may be in distant locations, or the document may be one among hundreds of others that have to be ready for the completion meeting. It would normally be intended that the deed was not to be delivered when it was executed, but only when everything was in place for completion to proceed; or
  • some deeds may be executed and delivered in escrow, which means that they cannot be retracted but will only take effect if some specific condition is satisfied (such as completion of the other components of the transaction). If the condition is fulfilled, the deed is deemed to have been delivered not at that time but at the time it was executed. But the parties may wish it to take effect at a different time.

In either case, the irrebuttable presumption was an obstacle, especially as the common law provides that, when a person has delivered a deed, he may – depending on the way the obligations are worded - be held to it even if someone else who was supposed to enter into it fails to do so.

Perhaps the single most significant change introduced by the Order is that new sections 74A and 36AA provide that in all cases the deed is presumed to be delivered when executed unless a contrary intention is proved. This opens the way for the parties to establish – for example, by stating the fact in the relevant board minutes or in covering letters, or by exchange of letters or agreement – when delivery is to occur, regardless of whether a purchaser is involved.

On a related point, the Order amends the 1989 Act so that, where a solicitor, notary or licensed conveyancer (including their respective agents or employees) delivers a deed on a party's behalf, it is conclusively presumed in favour of a purchaser that he is authorised to deliver it. This protection was formerly only available in connection with land transactions.

Execution under power of attorney

One option for a company – especially when the appropriate officers are not going to be available at critical times - is to grant a power of attorney in favour of one or more individuals or another company in order that they may execute and deliver deeds on the appointing company's behalf. This is not a last-minute solution, as the power itself must be executed as a deed.

Until the Order amended it, the 1989 Act, which lays down the essential characteristics of a deed, contained no express reference to execution of a deed by one person on another's behalf. This omission, now repaired, was not usually seen as a problem in practice.

As a result of new wording in, variously, the 1925 Act, the 1985 Act, the 1989 Act and the Powers of Attorney Act 1971:

  • it is now mandatory, when an individual attorney executes a deed on behalf of a company, that his signature is written in the presence of and attested by a witness.
  • if the attorney is a company, it must execute the deed in the way that it would if it were itself entering the deed as principal rather than as attorney: in other words, using its seal in accordance with section 74, or by the signature of two directors or one director and the secretary in accordance with section 36A, or using its seal in accordance with its articles of association. (There are special provisions in section 74(4) under which an officer of a corporate attorney can validly convey interests in property if he does so in the name of the appointor and, if the instrument is a deed, in the presence of a witness who attests his signature.
  • it is now clear that execution by an attorney confers the benefit of the statutory presumptions of due execution and delivery in the same way as execution by the appointing company would have done.
  • it is expressly permissible for an individual attorney to sign the deed in the name of the appointing company, but it will be equally effective if the individual attorney signs in his own name. It is likely to be best practice for the attorney to state both names: for example, "X Limited by its duly authorised attorney, Y" or "Y, as duly authorised attorney of X Limited".
  • except where it executes in accordance with section 74(4), mentioned above, a corporate attorney will necessarily use its own name as, in order to execute the document as a deed, it must use its own seal or execute under the hands of two of its directors or one director and the secretary. It is likely to be best practice to state both names.

The face value requirement

The 1989 Act already provided that a deed must make clear on its face that it is intended to be a deed, but no particular wording was prescribed.

It is common practice for deeds – whether they are executed under seal or by signature - to state at the end that they have been executed as deeds, and sometimes to describe themselves at the head of the document (and throughout) as deeds. New wording inserted by the Order now spells out that executing the document under seal is not enough on its own to satisfy the face value requirement.

This has had some unlooked-for consequences. For example, the articles of association of some companies, particularly in the context of private equity transactions, contain a power of attorney in favour of the company, allowing it to do certain things on behalf of members to give effect to bad-leaver, drag and other provisions. As the 1971 Act requires powers to be granted by deed, the validity of the power depends on the fact that the Companies Act provides that a company's articles bind the company and its members to the same extent as if they had been signed and sealed by each member. Now that this is not enough to give the articles the effect of a deed, new articles cannot effectively confer a power of attorney (although much the same result can be achieved by authorising the company in the articles to take the necessary actions, without purporting to grant a power).

Again in relation to the Companies Act, irrevocable undertakings to accept a takeover offer that are given (as the Act specifies) under seal and for no consideration must now satisfy the face value requirement or they will be of no contractual effect.

Limited liability partnerships and foreign corporations

Apparently by oversight, the Order does not deal expressly with execution by limited liability partnerships or by foreign corporations, despite the fact that in both cases the relevant statutory instruments rely on section 36A, stating that the section applies with the modifications set out in the instruments. On normal rules of statutory interpretation, the references to section 36A are to be taken as references to the section in its amended form. That means that the statutory instruments now incorporate inapt wording in places.

More seriously, neither of the statutory instruments refers to section 36AA, which sets out the prerequisites (due execution and delivery) for documents to be considered as validly executed as deeds by companies for the purposes of the 1989 Act, and contains the presumption (unless a contrary intention is proved) of delivery on execution. As a result of wording having been deleted from section 36A, the statutory instruments no longer say what is required for documents executed by LLPs and foreign companies to constitute deeds, and no longer confer a presumption of delivery.

The Department of Constitutional Affairs is considering the position.

Is that clear?

The Order brings greater uniformity to the disparate statutory sources by amending them, but perhaps what was really needed was to bring everything together in one place – and this form of legislation could not do that.

The drafting changes are shown in highlighted extracts from the relevant Acts in guidance published by the Department of Constitutional Affairs, available at The law is still rather technical and the effect of the newly-inserted language is not always self-evident to the ordinary reader. Some important common law concepts are not defined or expounded in the legislation: for example, the doctrine of delivery and the related doctrine of escrow. Although the Order has removed some pitfalls, it will still be necessary on occasion to seek expert advice.

It is also disappointing for business that the opportunity has not been taken to deal expressly with the electronic execution of documents

This article was written for Law-Now, CMS Cameron McKenna's free online information service. To register for Law-Now, please go to

Law-Now information is for general purposes and guidance only. The information and opinions expressed in all Law-Now articles are not necessarily comprehensive and do not purport to give professional or legal advice. All Law-Now information relates to circumstances prevailing at the date of its original publication and may not have been updated to reflect subsequent developments.

The original publication date for this article was 11/11/2005.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.