Thank you for getting in touch!

As far as my understanding of the Companies Act goes (which is, I emphasise, very limited!), banks do not have to declare those companies within which they hold nominee shares.

Hope this helps

Chris.

Hope you get this post – over a year later!

I am trying to understand what additional transparency would have been required for banks and nominee shareholders after the Companies Act 2006. For example, if a bank is a nominee shareholder in a limited company, would the new Act mean they had to disclose their ownership in limited companies?

Hope you can help with this query.

Many thanks

Nikki

In terms of radicalism, I think the provisions in the Companies Act for small shareholders to sue the board (where before, realistically, only the board could sue itself) are at the top of the list.

However, this is all just the start of the future and you’re quite right to say that legislation is not the silver bullet.

What happens next is anyone’s guess, though if anyone would care to crystal-ball gaze in public then your comments are welcome below!

And also a correction re. the UK requirements in 2006 companies act to be transparent on CR matters and directors’ responsibility to consider wider issues: in the context of UK corporate law and the companies act in particular, these requirements should be seen through the perspective of promoting shareholder value. It mandates ‘enlightened shareholder value’. But in case of conflicting value, e.g. between environment or employees, shareholder value takes precedence – so, this also means that what must be reported in the annual report has to be seen in light of this more narrow perspective. This is still a clear improvement, but not as radical as many CR proponents and social activists believe it to be…