In a landmark legal development, a judgment of the DIFC Courts has been recognised and enforced for the first time in a Western jurisdiction.

The Supreme Court of New South Wales, Australia, issued an order recognising and enforcing the DIFC Courts judgment issued by Justice Sir Richard Field in Legatum Limited v Arif Salim (CFI 027/2014).

In our October 2010 edition of Middle East Exchange, we looked at the general duties which directors and managers of UAE companies owe to their companies and their shareholders. In this edition, we consider the position where the company's financial position deteriorates. As directors or managers struggle with the inevitable commercial and operational pressures, what additional legal responsibilities and potential liabilities does UAE law place upon them?

On 15 June 2015, the Abu Dhabi Global Market (Global Market), Abu Dhabi’s financial free zone, published the following six new regulations concerning the regulation of non-financial services in the Global Market:

The ADGM was established in Abu Dhabi in 2013. However, the ADGM has only recently (on 15 June 2015) published its first set of commercial rules and regulations for non-financial services (the Regulations) relating to companies, insolvency, employment and real property and strata title. It is also expected to publish regulations for financial services later this year. ADGM’s intentions are clear.

CORONAVIRUS RESPONSE – INTRODUCING FLEXIBILITY TO DIRECTORS' DUTIES?

IN LIGHT OF COVID-19, THE UK GOVERNMENT RECENTLY ANNOUNCED ITS INTENTION TO TEMPORARILY SUSPEND THE OFFENCE OF WRONGFUL TRADING BY DIRECTORS OF UK COMPANIES. THIS WILL INEVITABLY HAVE A WIDE-RANGING EFFECT ON BOTH DIRECTORS AND CREDITORS.

The Government has put in place substantial measures that are intended to help mitigate the devastating effect of Covid-19 on the UK economy. Many businesses are now facing their toughest test in living memory. Yet even as the UK endures extraordinary lockdown measures, and with some 3.9 billion people in global isolation, directors of UK companies must continue to try and keep their businesses out of insolvency.

When a shareholder’s rights have not been observed by a company and/or its directors, it is possible for them to ask the court to impose a fair remedy.

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic presents directors of all business entities1 with a profound and unprecedented set of challenges. Now more than ever, key decision-takers in businesses appreciate that their actions will be carefully judged following the crisis. Scrutiny of their actions will come from a range of interested and affected parties including creditors, employees, trades unions, landlords, customers, regulators, insolvency practitioners and possibly even law enforcement.

Legal opinions can be complex, and certain areas require the provision of reasoning to support the opining firm’s conclusion. Parties should discuss and agree the scope of legal opinions as early as possible within the life cycle of a deal. This article discusses some common areas for consideration.

WHAT IS A LEGAL OPINION AND WHY IS IT USED?

Legal opinions are formal letters typically provided to confirm a specified legal position in relation to a document or a suite of transaction documents.

For example, a firm practising English law may be asked to opine on whether:

When a company director fails to carry out their legal responsibilities, they run the risk of being disqualified. This can be a lengthy procedure resulting in a period of disqualification during which it is not permitted to form, promote or manage a company.

The main law governing disqualification is contained in the Company Director Disqualification Act 1986.

Grounds for disqualification as a company director