"We couldn't do as good a job as we do without it. ½Û×ÓÊÓƵ gives us the security and confidence that we are best serving our clients because the information we are working on is the most accurate we can get"
Avensure
Access all documents on Shares
Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.
For our full legal glossary and more legal research sources, register for a free Lexis+ trial
Time limits for filing returns and paying tax—table FORTHCOMING CHANGE related to Making tax digital: As part of the government’s wider Making Tax Digital (MTD) programme: • subject to limited exceptions and deferrals, businesses within the scope of income tax and landlords will be required to submit quarterly digital updates to HMRC about their income and outgoings and returns in digital compatible formats with effect from April 2026, April 2027 or April 2028 for those with income in excess of £50,000, £30,000 or £20,000 respectively, and • the previous government consulted from 12 November 2020 to 5 March 2021 on the design for extending MTD to corporation tax on a voluntary basis from 2024 and a mandatory basis not before 2026, for more detail see News Analysis: Further provisions for draft Finance Bill 2021—Tax analysis—Business and enterprise The 2020 10 year roadmap for digitalising tax administration is explained in more detail in News Analysis: Making tax digital—getting on the virtual road. MTD for VAT has applied to...
EU Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID II) and Markets in Financial Instruments Regulation (MiFIR)—timeline This timeline shows key developments relating to the EU’s Markets in Financial Instruments Directive 2014/65/EU (MiFID II) and the Markets in Financial Instruments Regulation (EU) 600/2014 (MiFIR) (together, the EU's MiFID II framework). For earlier developments, see Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID II) and Markets in Financial Instruments Regulation (MiFIR)—timeline (2007–2023) [Archived]. For key developments relating to the UK’s MiFID II framework, see: UK MiFID II regime—timeline. 2025 Date Source Document Description 3 April 2025 ESMA ESMA consults on transparency requirements for derivatives under MiFIR ReviewMiFIR Review Consultation Package 4: Consultation Paper on transparency for derivatives, package orders and input/output data for the derivatives consolidated tape The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) has launched a consultation on three sets of proposed Regulatory Technical Standards (RTS) under the MiFIR Review. The consultation covers transparency requirements for exchange traded derivatives (ETD) and over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives, amendments to package orders requirements, and input/output data specifications...
Discover our 7 Checklists on Shares
Probate actions—lack of testamentary capacity With increased life expectancy comes increased mental illness as people’s bodies outlive their minds. Dementia and other mental illnesses including depression, anxiety, psychosis, confusion and personality disorders may all impact a testator’s ability to make a Will. In addition, drug use, alcoholism and recent bereavement can have a significant impact on capacity. Analysis of the test for testamentary capacity For the purpose of assessing a deceased individual's testamentary capacity, recent case law maintains that the test under Banks v Goodfellow is still the appropriate test. That test provides that the testator must: • understand the nature of the act of making a Will and its effects • understand the extent of their estate of which they are disposing by Will • understand and appreciate any claims against their estate, and • not suffer from any ‘disorder of the mind’ such as to impair or influence the above factors In Leonard v Leonard the High Court set out an authoritative and...
Social media and user-generated content This Practice Note examines some of the key risks associated with a brand’s usage of social media and user-generated content (UGC). Its particular focus is on the potential infringement of third party rights, such as intellectual property (IP). It provides practical guidance on how parties engaged in such activities can mitigate those risks. Social media Social media is an extremely popular means of communicating online. Based on user participation and interaction, social media takes a variety of forms, including: • online social and business networking (eg Facebook, LinkedIn, Snapchat, Instagram) • online blogs (eg Twitter (now X), Blogger.com) • online forums (eg Mumsnet, Reddit) • online shops and auctions (eg eBay, Amazon) • online digital media sharing (eg YouTube, Vimeo, Flickr, TikTok) • online reference texts (eg Wikipedia) • online games and applications (eg World of Warcraft) User-generated content Increasingly, businesses are encouraging consumers to contribute material to social media platforms and are incorporating these contributions into consumer-focused advertising and marketing campaigns. Often, this might...
Discover our 90 Practice Notes on Shares
Board minutes—payment of cash dividend—private limited company (shares) Company number: [insert company number] [insert company name] [LIMITED OR LTD] Minutes of a meeting of the board of directors (the Meeting) of [insert company name] [Limited OR Ltd] (the Company) Held at [insert place of meeting] Held on [insert day, month and year of meeting] at [insert time of meeting][am OR pm] Present: [Insert names of any directors present, whether physically or by any remote means (unless such means are specifically excluded by the company’s articles of association)] [by [insert means of attendance for each director attending remotely]] [ In attendance: ] [[Insert name of anyone in attendance, whether physically or by any remote means, who does not count towards the quorum for the meeting (eg the company secretary, any legal advisers)]] [ Apologies: ] [[Insert names of any directors who are unable to attend the meeting]] 1 Chair, notice and quorum [Insert name] was appointed Chair of the Meeting. The Chair...
Board minutes—approving the adoption of an unapproved option plan and the grant of unapproved options [insert name of company adopting the unapproved option plan] (Company)—[insert Company number] Minutes of a meeting of the[ remuneration committee of the] board of directors of the Company held at [insert place of meeting] on [insert date of meeting] at [insert time of meeting]. Present [insert name of director to be Chair] (the Chair) [insert names of directors present] In attendance [insert names of those in attendance] Apologies [insert names of directors who are unable to attend meeting] 1 Notice and quorum [insert name of Chair] was appointed Chair of the meeting. It was reported that proper notice of the meeting had been given in accordance with the Company's articles of association (Articles) and that a quorum was present. Accordingly, the Chair declared the meeting open. 2 Purpose of meeting The Chair reported that the purpose of the meeting was to consider and, if thought fit, approve: 2.1 the adoption...
Dive into our 350 Precedents related to Shares
What is a systematic internaliser under UK MiFIR? What is a systematic internaliser? A firm will be a systematic internaliser (SI) if it deals on own account on a substantial (as well as organised, frequent and systematic) basis when executing client orders outside a UK regulated market (RM), UK multilateral trading facility (MTF) or UK organised trading facility (OTF). The definition of SIs applies only where a firm's over-the-counter (OTC) trading meets quantitative thresholds for both 'frequent and systematic' and 'substantial': • the 'frequent and systematic' threshold is based on the number of OTC trades in the financial instrument carried out by the firm on own account when executing client orders • the 'substantial' threshold is based on either: (i) the size of the OTC trading carried out by the firm in relation to its total trading in a specific financial instrument or (ii) the size of the firm's OTC trading carried out by the investment firm in relation to the total trading in the relevant area (within the meaning...
Can a company pay for or indemnify one of its directors in relation to a fine which has been imposed on such director following civil or criminal proceedings? We assume in this Q&A that the company is a private company limited by shares. A company is generally prohibited from indemnifying its directors against any liability in connection with any negligence, default, breach of duty or trust in relation to the company (section 232(1) of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006)). However, directors can be protected from liability by the acquisition and maintenance of insurance by the company for its directors against liabilities and by the company giving qualifying indemnities to its directors against certain liabilities (CA 2006, s 232(2)). Accordingly, a company may purchase a directors’ and officers’ insurance policy (D&O policy) to protect a director from liability (CA 2006, s 233). A D&O policy covering the liabilities of directors is a commercial product. The range of cover will depend on the terms negotiated with the...
See the 6 Q&As about Shares
This week’s edition of Private Client highlights includes: (1) Changizi v Changizi, where a non-exempt beneficiary’s share of estate was liable for IHT under Re Ratcliffe; (2) Argyll and Bute Council v RF (by his litigation friend, the Official Solicitor), in which the Court of Protection refuses an application for recognition and enforcement of a Scottish Guardianship order; (3) Abbasi v Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust; Haastrup v King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, in which the Supreme Court held that anonymity for clinicians in withdrawal of treatment cases involving children should normally be of limited duration; (4) Companies House launches a new voluntary identity verification service; (5) Armstrong v Bhattacharya, which highlights the importance of clear, contemporaneous documentary evidence and a consistent case in circumstances where a person wishes to demonstrate that ownership of a property differs to that which is recorded at HM Land Registry; (6) Tedford v Clarke, in which the court held that although a Will was badly drafted, it was not meaningless and...
This week's edition of Share Incentives weekly highlights includes (1) an update from the FCA on its PISCES sandbox framework following proposals in consultation paper CP24/29, (2) a focus on executive pay as the AGM season continues and (3) a new Q&A which considers whether an option holder can claim business asset disposal relief in relation to the sale of shares resulting from their EMI option exercise if a disqualifying event has previously occurred.
Read the latest 9 News articles on Shares
**Trials are provided to all ½Û×ÓÊÓƵ content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these ½Û×ÓÊÓƵ services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK, Ireland and selected UK overseas territories and Caribbean countries. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
0330 161 1234