Click here to go back to the website

Archive for December, 2009

New Rules for Companies - Deed Execution by Attorney

Tuesday, December 22nd, 2009

New Rules for Companies – Execution of Deeds by Attorney

 

In an earlier blog I have referred to the difficulties that Company Directors often have when preparing documents for their foreign activities, in doing so in a way which complies with the relevant legal requirements. What is often overlooked, due usually to urgency and lack of time, is the fact that most foreign jurisdictions require that a Deed executed in the UK should comply with UK law as well as the law of their own jurisdiction.

 

Time and time again Directors of UK companies think that they can get their Company Deeds executed by an employee who is not one of the Directors, simply because the Company has passed a Resolution to do so. Just because a Company makes a Resolution, this does not in fact change the law! As I explain in my earlier blog, a Company Deed must comply with the law, and be executed by two Directors or by one Director and the Company Secretary either witnessing the affixing of the Seal of the Company, or by them signing on behalf of the Company. Another way is for a Director to sign as a Deed in the presence of a witness who also signs.

 

All of the above methods require that at least one Director is actually available to sign and of course this is often where the problems arise.

 

Now s.47 of the Companies Act has been brought into force since October 2009, and it can assist a prudent Company. What the section does is allow a Company to prepare a Deed of Power of Attorney (using one of the methods above) in favour of any person - who can be another Company, or an employee of the Company, or a lawyer for the Company - expressly including the power to appoint a sub-delegate.

 

Then, when an urgent need arises for a Power of Attorney or other Deed to be executed by the Company at a time when the Directors are unavailable , that named Attorney can now validly execute the Deed on behalf of the Company. This authority derives, please note, from the previous Deed of Power of Attorney and not from a resolution at a hastily convened Board Meeting

 

I would suggest that this is a very useful tool particularly for busy UK Companies with Directors who live or work overseas.

 

I do also point out that many foreign jurisdictions do not consider a Power of Attorney to be reliable when over 12 months old. Therefore a Company minded to grant a standing Power of Attorney to one or more persons whether generally or for specific purposes written in the Power should in my opinion be careful to include an expiry date in each Deed, and to remember to renew at least annually.

 

As ever, please do contact me if you would like your Company to proceed in the way which s.47 of the 2006 Companies Act now permits.

More Nonsense from India

Monday, December 14th, 2009

MORE INDIAN NONSENSE – FROM THE PUNJAB!

 

In my first blog I gave an explanation of the difficulties which have been caused by the decision of the Indian Government to adopt The Hague Convention without ensuring that lawyers and the Courts and regional administrations throughout India actually take any notice. The problem is that whilst international law now says that the only further legalisation stamp required when documents are executed in England and Wales for use in India is the Foreign and Commonwealth Apostille – the Indians in India are seeking to insist upon an additional High Commission stamp- which the High Commission is reluctant to give because to do so would be in breach of the Convention agreement.

 

These difficulties are continuing despite the fact that the Special Commission of the Hague conference has issued a specific rebuke to India The SC recalls that Article 9 does not permit legalisation by diplomatic or consular agents when the Apostille Convention applies. The SC reminds States Parties of their obligation to take the necessary steps to ensure compliance with the provisions of this Article.”

 

One of my brother Notaries, Mr Ram Bansal of Southall has found that his clients are being seriously inconvenienced by this, particularly in the Punjab and he has written with a complaint. Below is the response which he has received.

 

 

GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE AND REHABILITATION (STAMP AND REGISTRATION BRANCH)

TO:

 

Sh. Ram T. Bansal, LLB, LLM, Solicitor, Notary Public,

Attorney- At Law, New York,

2nd Floor, 92A The Broadway, Southall, Middlesex, UBI, lQF,

England, United Kingdom.

 

Memo No. 22/1/88-ST VI /8852 Chandigarh, dated the 17-11-09

Subject: - Legalisation of Power of Attorney.

Vide your letter dated 7.9.2009, it has been requested that the document such as power of Attorney etc. Which are sent from England to India and are Apostilled by the authority of U.K. may be accepted and the condition of countersigning from High Commission of India in U.K. may· be removed. 2. In this connection, it is informed that the above suggestion given by you have been considered and it has noticed that such documents which are being received from all countries such as U.K., U.S.A., Canada, Italy, Australia, Kuwait, Malaysia, New Zealand etc. are counter-signed by Indian Embassy, Consulate General of India and High Commission of India in that country, therefore, there is no need to change the existing instructions issued by Govt. of Punjab. / Deputy Secretary Revenue

 

Of course, this letter completely ignores Article 1 of the Convention agreement and the fact that the National Government of India has changed the law. It shows that the Punjab local Government is using a somewhat childish logic – it is saying very clearly that it will not amend its behaviour and adopt the law of its own country simply because it has noticed that it is being allowed to carry on as it always did.

 

At least they have provided written confirmation of the nature of the problem!