We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. Learn more here.Close Me
In February 2012, the Financial Reporting Council
("FRC") published a report of
discussions between companies and investors on what constitutes an
explanation under the comply or explain approach in the UK
Corporate Governance Code. In light of the debate in Europe about
the future of comply or explain and whether there should be more
prescriptive regulation, the FRC concluded that it would be
appropriate to address the question of what constitutes a
meaningful explanation under comply or explain in order to
promote explanations that are full enough to meet the needs of
shareholders.
The FRC has pulled together a number of conclusions from the
discussions, including that:
The starting point should be an improvement in the general
quality of disclosure in relation to corporate governance and a
clear explanation by each company as to how its corporate
governance arrangements support its business model;
The chairman could play an important part in this and the
chairman's statements could be fuller than they are currently
in relation to corporate governance. More specifically, insights
into how key features of leadership and board effectiveness are
achieved in practice could be included in the chairman's
statement; and
Companies that provide a clear explanation of their approach to
corporate governance could find that shareholders are more prepared
to accept their explanation if they choose to deviate from a
particular provision of the Code.
The report looks at the context of explanations, what elements
are needed for a meaningful explanation and obstacles to greater
disclosure. The key elements for a meaningful explanation are that
it should:
Set the context and historical background;
Provide a convincing rationale for the deviation that is
specific to the company, ensuring the explanations are
understandable as well as persuasive;
State what mitigating action the company is taking to maintain
conformity with the relevant principle of the Code and to address
any additional risk; and
Indicate whether the deviation from the Code's provisions
was limited in time and when the company intends to return to
conformity with the Code's provisions.
The FRC is considering whether to reflect the conclusions of
these discussions in the revised UK Corporate Governance Code on
which it is intending to consult later in 2012.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
Business Owners often ask whether a contract that their company is entering into can in fact take effect from an earlier date compared to the date on which it is to be signed by the parties.
This decision shows that there is a difference between an obligation to carry out works diligently and an obligation to use all reasonable endeavours to ensure that works are completed.
In this instance, the Protector cast himself in a role which went well beyond what was proper and led him to play an overactive part in the management of the trusts in some respects and to neglect his duties in others.
Readers of the bulletin will be aware of the recent discovery, disinterment and identification of what have now been clearly established to be the bones of King Richard III from the site of the former Greyfriars (Franciscan) Church in Leicester.
Companies that need to enter administration have a number of methods available to them to enter into this insolvency procedure.
Some comments from our readers… “The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable” “I often find critical information not available elsewhere” “As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”
