We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. Learn more here.Close Me
On June 21, 2012, the Canadian Securities Administrators
(CSA) published Consultation Paper 25-401
— Potential Regulation of Proxy Advisory
Firms. In light of the increased demand for the services
of proxy advisors, the paper seeks to initiate a discussion of
concerns about the effect of such services on the Canadian capital
markets and how these concerns may best be addressed by Canadian
securities regulators.
The potential concerns identified by the CSA which they are
seeking public response on include:
any possible conflicts of interest that arise due to the fact
that proxy advisors provide both vote recommendations on governance
matters and consulting services or that arise due to their
ownership structures;
the perceived lack of transparency in how vote recommendations
are determined by proxy advisors and the lack of public disclosure
of their reports;
the limited engagement proxy advisors have with issuers which
may result in potential inaccuracies in their reports and
recommendations;
the potential for proxy advisors to become corporate governance
standard setters which may result in issuers being compelled to
adopt "one-size fits all" standards which may not be
suitable for their circumstances; and
the extent of institutional investor reliance on proxy advisory
recommendations. One particular distinction identified is how
reliance upon proxy advisors may differ between larger and smaller
institutions.
The paper concludes that neither the current registration or
proxy solicitation regime is the appropriate framework for
regulation of proxy advisors, if regulation is in fact needed. The
CSA is seeking consultation on whether any of the following regimes
is appropriate for regulation: a separate regime applicable to
proxy advisory firms; a certification regime or a requirements and
disclosure framework.
The CSA staff initiative follows international regulatory
initiatives which are addressing the role of the proxy advisors in
capital markets and the appropriate standards of transparency and
accountability of such advisors. The paper invites public comment
on these issues until August 20, 2012.
Norton Rose Group
Norton Rose Group is a leading international legal practice.
We offer a full business law service to many of the world's
pre-eminent financial institutions and corporations from offices in
Europe, Asia, Australia, Canada, Africa, the Middle East, Latin
America and Central Asia.
Knowing how our clients' businesses work and
understanding what drives their industries is fundamental to us.
Our lawyers share industry knowledge and sector expertise across
borders, enabling us to support our clients anywhere in the world.
We are strong in financial institutions; energy; infrastructure,
mining and commodities; transport; technology and innovation; and
pharmaceuticals and life sciences.
We have more than 2900 lawyers operating from 43 offices in
Abu Dhabi, Almaty, Amsterdam, Athens, Bahrain, Bangkok, Beijing,
Bogotá, Brisbane, Brussels, Calgary, Canberra, Cape Town,
Caracas, Casablanca, Dubai, Durban, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Hong Kong,
Johannesburg, London, Melbourne, Milan, Montréal, Moscow,
Munich, Ottawa, Paris, Perth, Piraeus, Prague, Québec, Rome,
Shanghai, Singapore, Sydney, Tokyo, Toronto and Warsaw; and from
associate offices in Dar es Salaam, Ho Chi Minh City and
Jakarta.
Norton Rose Group comprises Norton Rose LLP, Norton Rose
Australia, Norton Rose Canada LLP, Norton Rose South Africa
(incorporated as Deneys Reitz Inc), and their respective
affiliates.
On January 1, 2012, Macleod Dixon joined Norton Rose
Group adding strength and depth in Canada, Latin America and around
the world. For more information please visit
nortonrose.com.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
An insider trading decision of the Alberta Securities Commission (the "Commission") released on April 10, 2013, provides a thoughtful and practical approach by a securities commission to its assessment of what constitutes a "material fact".
This article touches on some of the key types of businesses and explains what a might be the typical role of a lawyer in providing advice or assistance to you in setting up your business or in having others join you in your business.
In the decision MDV Representations v. Corporation Xprima.com, the Superior Court highlights the importance of drafting termination clauses in a service contract using clear and simple language.
The Alberta Court of Appeal has recently released a decision that adds much needed clarity to when an officer or director of a corporation will be personally liable for torts committed by a corporation.
A discussion on a recent case, which provides a cautionary tale on the dangers of entering into a share purchase agreement and subsequently closing a share purchase transaction, without ample due diligence.
In our last post, we outlined some of the reasons why corporate spin-offs are used. In this post, we address some of the most common methods used to implement the corporate spin-off.
Crowd Funding: Raising Capital For Business Start-Ups & SME's (Video Content)
