19/12/2024Sole Directors and Model Articles – Problem Solved?
Hashmi v Lorimer-Wing [2022] EWHC 191 (Ch) established a controversial principle in the realm of… Read more
08/03/2017
In December 2016, the AIM Disciplinary Committee (“ADC”) privately censured an AIM company and imposed a fine of £75,000 for failing to inform or seek their nominated adviser’s advice regarding a series of business developments.
The ADC further held that it was not appropriate for the company to decide whether or not the business developments were disclosable based solely on its own assessment of its obligations under the AIM Rules, without reference to the nominated adviser.
It was further noted that:-
The notice underlines the importance of an AIM company’s AIM Rule 31 obligations to liaise with its nominated adviser. In particular AIM Rule 31 should be narrowly interpreted and requires a company to provide full, timely and regular information to its nominated adviser.
Hashmi v Lorimer-Wing [2022] EWHC 191 (Ch) established a controversial principle in the realm of… Read more
This whitepaper, The Football Governance Bill and the Independent Football Regulator: A Brave New World?,… Read more
The Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”) has released some new guidance and provided a reminder to… Read more
Earlier this year, we published The Hundred: Hit For Six?, which examined the ECB’s reported… Read more