Are you compliant with AIM Rule 26?
From 28 September 2018, all AIM companies are required to adopt a recognised corporate governance code such as the UK Corporate Governance Code or the QCA Corporate Governance Code and comply with that corporate governance code on a 'comply or explain' basis.
From 28 September 2018, all AIM companies are required to adopt a recognised corporate governance code such as the UK Corporate Governance Code or the QCA Corporate Governance Code and comply with that corporate governance code on a 'comply or explain' basis. Previously, AIM companies had the freedom to choose which code, if any, applies, or set out their own arrangements.
AIM companies should state on their website:
- what code the company has decided will apply;
- how the AIM company complies with that code; and
- if no code has been adopted, detail its current corporate governance arrangements.
This information should be reviewed yearly and the date it was last reviewed should be also be set out on an AIM listed companies website.
The governance codes and the changing world of corporate governance
Over the coming months many government departments will be busy making provision for the UK’s exit from the EU – and, whilst Brexit developments grab the majority of the headlines, separately there is a huge amount of work going on to implement changes to the UK’s corporate governance regime, including capturing AIM listed companies within some of the new arrangements. We only need to recall the media coverage of recent high profile corporate failures, such as Carillion and BHS, to understand why the topic of good governance is high on the political agenda.
The reforms are being introduced through a combination of new statutory reporting requirements and changes to the UK Corporate Governance Code (Code), AIM Rules and QCA.
The 2018 UK Corporate Governance Code
The FRC has published a revised 2018 Code which will apply to accounting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2019. If the 2018 Code is the recognised code an AIM company has chosen to follow, the revised Code is much shorter, sharper and has fewer provisions than the previous version.
The 2018 Code contains important themes on promoting diversity of gender, social and ethnic backgrounds, and enhancing transparency and diversity in a company’s succession pipeline. New provisions include:
- Companies should establish a method for gathering workforce views, using one or a combination of:
- a director appointed from the workforce,
- a formal workforce advisory panel,
- a designated non-executive director.
- A broader role for the remuneration committee.
- Chairs should consider having regularly externally facilitated board evaluations (in FTSE 350 companies, this should happen at least every three years).
- Premium listed companies are required to explain intended actions to consult with shareholders where 20% or more votes are cast against a resolution recommended by the board on executive pay (and other matters).
- Premium listed companies will also be expected to comply with the associated FRC ‘Guidance on Audit Committees’ which provides guidelines for mandatory audit retendering and rotation of auditors. The guidance is based on experiences of audit tenders since the requirement was introduced into the UK Corporate Governance Code in 2012.
QCA Corporate Governance Code
According to QCA research, over half of the 900+ AIM companies have historically chosen adopt the QCA Corporate Governance Code (the QCA Code). A new version of the QCA Code was published on 25 April this year. This caters for small and medium-size firms.
The latest version of the QCA Code addresses the concerns from the Government’s Green Paper consultation on corporate governance reform. New provisions include:
- Ten corporate governance principles;
- Promotes a corporate culture which is based on ethical values and behaviours;
- Promotes stakeholder engagement with shareholders as well as employees, customers, suppliers, regulators and others;
- A change in approach to risk management from reporting risks to actions and outcomes;
- A requirement for companies to disclose and explain any actions or reasons where there are a significant proportion (i.e. 20% and above) of votes against a resolution at a general meeting;
- Suggests that to meet shareholder expectations, companies should consider whether it is appropriate to have a senior independent director (section 4 of the QCA Code); and
- Advises on factors that may hinder directors’ independence.
Given the increased focus of government, stakeholders and society as a whole on the importance of good corporate governance and the need for greater transparency and accountability, AIM companies should be reviewing their existing governance arrangements and preparing to make a comply or exchange statement in respect of their chosen recognised code.
You may be interested in...
Progress on the Automated Vehicles Bill
Data protection in higher education: what to expect in 2024
The rise of AI in construction
In Person Event
Government foreshadows significant savings for public bodies as part of data protection overhaul
ICO consultation on transparency in health and social care
How to mitigate risk in disputes arising from AI use in technology projects
Copyright issues with AI webinar
Monitoring workers – ICO guidance
ICO consultation on fertility tracking apps
UK: Legal issues with deepfakes
New guidance for employers on subject access requests published by the ICO
Ali Round 2 - High Court gives further guidance on causation and quantum for data breaches
Browne Jacobson welcomes former ICO lawyer to support growing UK&I data privacy and tech practice
Update on data protection claims - Austrian Post Case
Browne Jacobson launches specialist Ascensus programme for in house lawyers and business leaders
Mopping up after a leak – how businesses can take steps to protect their confidential information
Cyber security and data breaches
Browne Jacobson’s intellectual property lawyers ranked experts in World Trademark Review guide 2023
Update on the Digital Services Act (“DSA”) – Important Dates and Deadlines Looming
Government publishes its proposals for expanding the Scope of the Network and Information Systems Regulations 2018
Protecting children and their data in the online environment
Bruce Willis AI and the problem with deepfakes
A deepfake of Bruce Willis is advertising Russian mobile phones. Many great artistic and metaphysical questions are raised by this performance. However, this article is going to look at the intellectual property law implications, from a UK perspective.
DSA approved: Targeted Advertising Rules explained
Economic crime and cybercrime
It is clear that the digital landscape, often termed cyberspace, is a man-made environment, in which human behaviour dominates and where technology both influences and aids our role in it — through the internet, telecoms and networked computer systems, which are often interdependent. The extent to which any organisation is potentially vulnerable to cyber-attack depends on how well these elements are aligned.
Data reform in the UK
Since the UK left the EU and are now able to move away from the EU data protection regime, the UK government have implemented a national data strategy with the aim of reducing the burden on organisations but maintaining a high data protection standard.
Are local authority companies subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000?
In this article we look at local authority companies and whether they are subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000. And for those that are, what information are they legally obliged to submit.
Digital Markets Act and Data Platforms - FRANDs for life?
The Digital Markets Act (the “DMA”) joins the dots between competition law and data protection law and actively targets data-driven platforms. It is also a comprehensive regulation to take note of, with familiar GDPR-style fines tied to turnover.
Avoiding the pitfalls of WhatsApp
The use of social media platforms and applications can have overwhelmingly positive benefits for public bodies. However, regulatory action recently taken by the Information Commissioner, has highlighted various pitfalls that public bodies should seek to avoid if allowing staff to use social media as a communication tool.
ICO consultation on research provisions guidance
The data protection legislation (namely, the UK GDPR and Data Protection Act 2018) contain various provisions that deal with the processing of personal data for research purposes.
More good news for data controllers: High Court finds local authority not vicariously liable for the actions of social worker who went off on a "frolic of her own"
Five top tips for strong data compliance in 2022
This article has five excellent top tips for strong data compliance in 2022, including; embracing near misses, leading from the top, outcomes-focused training, learning walks, consequences.
Stemming the tide of data breach claims: good news for data controllers
The cases summarised give considerable comfort to data controllers seeking to defend themselves against claims that relate to breaches arising as a result of a failure rather than a direct act and/or are based on assertions of damage or distress that are exaggerated, unsubstantiated or bear little relation to the breach itself.
Reaction: Supreme Court rules in favour of Google
What are the requirements of cookie law
Cookies and similar technologies are a useful and often necessary tool for online businesses, but their use is governed by both the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations (PECR) and the GDPR.
Steps to take following a data breach: reporting, criminal charges and injunctions
Student and staff files will be full of personal data, much of which may be particularly sensitive such as health information (known under the data protection legislation as “special category” data).
Confidential information and subject access disclosure
In February 2021, the High Court handed down judgment London Borough of Lambeth v AM (No. 2)  EWHC 186 (QB), in which Browne Jacobson LLP acted for the Claimant Council. The judgment is critical reading for public bodies who are required to take action to restrict the use of confidential information in circumstances where that information has been inadvertently disclosed to a third-party.
Lloyd v Google – what next?
The Supreme Court’s pending decision could potentially open the floodgates for data privacy litigation going forward.
Claims club - 16 June 2021
High Court grants local authority injunction to prevent breach of confidence
This judgment is critical reading for public bodies who need to take action to restrain the use of confidential information in circumstances where that information has been inadvertently disclosed to a third party.