COVID-19: Cash conservation and dividend dilemmas
Cash conservation in what is now an uncertain economic environment has left some company directors with dilemmas over their expected or already announced dividend payments. ICSA has published a useful guidance note setting out options for directors to consider ahead of general meetings. We briefly discuss the ICSA note, the legal differences between interim and final dividends, and options for postponing, amending or cancelling dividends.
Directors’ duties and distributable reserves
Focus on cash conservation is leading many directors to reconsider their approaches to interim and final dividends and their company’s dividend policy. When recommending and paying a dividend, directors need to consider their general duties under the Companies Act 2006 (the Act), including the duty to “promote the success of the company”. Additionally, directors should remember that dividends may only be made lawfully out of distributable reserves, and directors should also consider the effect of the payment of any cash distribution on the company’s cash reserves. The impact of events, such as unexpected losses after the date of the relevant balance sheet for determining distributable reserves, must be considered before directors go ahead with dividend payments.
In general terms, it should be easier logistically for a board to cancel, change or delay an “interim” dividend than a “final” dividend. By way of reminder, final dividends, under the Act require shareholders’ approval, after they are recommended by the directors. Once approved by shareholders at a general meeting of a public company, or by way of shareholder meeting or a written shareholder resolution for a private company, the dividend becomes a debt due. This debt is then enforceable by the shareholders against the company. By contrast, interim dividends are declared by the directors and, unless also approved by shareholders, do not constitute a debt until paid.
In principle, a company may pay a smaller interim dividend and then a larger final dividend, a series of interim dividends or a combination of final and interim dividends - more than one final or interim dividend can be paid. In each case, the directors should consult the company’s articles of association (the Articles) to check any particular requirements relating to dividends.
Withdrawing directors’ support
Directors can still change dividend plans after an interim dividend is announced to shareholders and/or a final dividend resolution is included in a notice of a general meeting. From a legal perspective, the directors may remove their recommendation in relation to an announced interim dividend and update the market accordingly of a delay to the dividend payment, a reduction in the amount to be paid or a complete cancellation of the interim dividend. Alternatively, if the resolution for a final dividend has already been included in a notice of a general meeting, the directors may update the market that they no longer support the resolution and that it will not be put to the vote at the general meeting. In each case, the directors should explain to the shareholders the reasons for the withdrawal of the directors’ support for the particular dividend in the announcement to the market.
Returning to shareholders
If the shareholders have already approved the dividend, subject to the Articles, the directors may still be able to stop the dividend payment. As noted by ICSA, companies “cannot withdraw or amend final dividends after they have been declared by shareholders”. We would however, encourage directors to seek advice at this stage as to whether delaying the dividend payment and seeking shareholder approval to cancel the dividend would be feasible. If such an approach was determined by the board to “promote the success of the company”, another shareholder meeting could, in principle, be called.
Proxy voting considerations
A company may have to determine how to deal with proxy votes submitted prior to resolutions being amended or withdrawn. A person appointed as a proxy has an obligation under the Act to follow the instructions of the appointing shareholder. As such, the appointing shareholder could provide the proxy (potentially the chairman given the wider COVID-19 related restrictions on meetings) with updated instructions prior to the general meeting. In the absence of updated instructions, we together with ICSA would expect the proxy to vote on any amended resolution, in line with the original instructions.
Implications for MAR and the equity story
For a listed company, a change to an announced dividend or a dividend policy, already communicated to the market is likely to constitute inside information from a Market Abuse Regulation (MAR) perspective. Advisers should be consulted on any MAR considerations, even if the decision is not to propose to pay a dividend rather than to cancel one already announced. Additionally, the dividend policy may be an important part of the equity story. We would recommend that the “messaging” around delaying, reducing or even cancelling a proposed dividend is discussed with the company’s financial advisers to avoid the longer-term equity story of the company being undermined.
For more information, please contact Andrew Collins.
Sponsor Licence Compliance: Key considerations & how to be audit ready
Join us for the third in our series of mini webinars on post Brexit immigration about sponsor licence compliance.
The Future of Property Careers
Join to our panel discussion and Q&A with industry leaders on the range of opportunities within the property and construction sector.
New tax on property developers - consultation paper published
The government published a consultation paper on the design of the new residential property developers tax.
Procuring modular housing: Is MMC becoming mainstream?
Is Modern Methods of Construction becoming mainstream? Read what it means for Development and Procurement here.
Dual class share structures: how do they work and what are the pros and cons?
Dual class share structures allow a shareholder, for example the founder, to retain voting control over a company.
Q&A: Talking the telecoms talk
Georgina Muskett and Jonathan Wills answer queries on Electronic Communications Code agreement.
Property Patter: Navigating the complexities of Pharmacy Property
Pharmacy property is a specialist area which contains many traps for the unwary.
COVID-19 Vaccination – can an employer make it compulsory for employees?
We review what legal issues to take into account when considering to make vaccination compulsory as an employer.
The Lawyer, New Law Journal, International Adviser, CDR Magazine and eprivateclient report on the firm's partner promotions
Charles Russell Speechlys promoted five lawyers to partner, effective 1 May 2021.
Linking ESG and Executive Pay
How does a business go about embedding a focus on strong ESG performance into the structures and culture of its organisation?
National Security and Investment Act granted Royal Assent
The Act establishes a new regime for the review of mergers, acquisitions and other transactions that could threaten national security.
Recent Trends In Firewall Legislation: BVI, Bermuda And Gibraltar
Charles Russell Speechlys advises Waverton on acquisition of Cornerstone Asset Management
Established in July 2010 and with offices in Edinburgh and Glasgow, Cornerstone offers wealth management and financial planning advice.
What do the new Debt Respite Scheme Regulations mean for Landlords and Tenants?
This will provide legal protection from creditors in the form of either a breathing space or a mental health crisis moratorium.
Charles Russell Speechlys promotes five to Partner
The promotions are effective 1 May 2021 and are accompanied by one Legal Director and 15 Senior Associate promotions.
Risk allocation in commercial leases: the High Court considers rent suspension, insurance and frustration arguments
Read our summary of the full judgement on the latest Covid arrears case.
Charles Russell Speechlys boosts private wealth offering with the hire of an international tax team
Robert Reymond will be joined at the firm by Leigh Nicoll, Emma Tyrrell and Oliver Cooper.
Proposed Takeover Code Amendments – Key Changes
The Consultation Paper has now been followed by a corresponding response paper which made certain modifications to the initial proposals.
Building Back Better: Future Gazing
What’s next for the hospitality industry post-pandemic?
Building Back Better: Re-examining your proposition
Why hospitality businesses should re-examine their proposition now