Johnson Winter & Slattery is engaged by major businesses, investment funds and government agencies as legal counsel on important transactions and disputes throughout Australia and surrounding regions.
We are continually evolving and adapting our diversity and inclusion programs to better support our people, clients and communities.
Our news and media coverage including major transaction announcements, practitioner appointments and team expansions.
We support a number of community initiatives and not for profit organisations across Australia through pro bono legal work and charitable donations.
Our firm provides a diverse range of opportunities for talented, enthusiastic people to develop brilliant legal careers.
On 5 May 2020, the Treasurer issued the Corporations (Coronavirus Economic Response) Determination (No.1) 2020.
The effect of determination is to temporarily modify certain provisions of the Corporations Act for a period of 6 months from 6 May 2020.
The determination will permit virtual meetings for companies, managed investment schemes and creditors and facilitate electronic execution by companies.
Before the determination, the generally accepted view was that there was real doubt as to whether an Australian company could hold a “virtual” members meeting, that is a meeting that did not have at least one physical venue at which members could attend in person, if they chose to do so.
COVID-19 related emergency limitations on travel and gatherings have made physical meetings impossible or at least impracticable.
The generally accepted view was that unless a company’s constitution expressly provided for a virtual meeting, a virtual meeting might be invalid. This was subject to a possible validation of procedural irregularities and non-compliance under section 1322 of the Corporations Act.
The determination modifies a variety of provisions relating to meetings under the Corporations Act to enable virtual meetings to be held.
Proxies can be appointed using one or more technologies specified in the notice meeting.
Notice of meeting
A notice meeting may be given using one or more technologies, by giving them notice or other material or online location where those items can be viewed or downloaded. The determination contains an example of sending a notice or link by email where the company has email addresses of members, and sending a letter or postcard to other members setting out a URL for viewing or downloading the notice and other material.
The person required or permitted to give a notice of meeting must include information in the notice of meeting about attendees can participate in the meeting, including voting and speaking.
The determination also overcomes limitations in the Corporations Act provisions dealing with execution of company documents, in particular section 127. There is case law to the effect that section 127 requires a “single static document” (that is paper document) to be executed by two company officers meaning that company documents cannot be executed remotely or electronically (see Pickard v Bendigo Bank  SASC 123).
However, the determination allows two company officers to sign separate paper copies or counterparts of the same document and allows electronic execution – of an electronic document – by two company officers in separate places.
The method used to electronically execute the document must:
In establishing that the method has identified the person and indicated the person’s intentions, regard can be had to additional evidence – not just the method of execution itself. This will likely prove to be a very useful aspect of the determination.
This all means that the determination should allow a flexible approach to electronic execution. The Explanatory Statement to the determination gives a number of examples, including pasting in a signature, using a touch screen to sign or using a document execution platform.
It is also possible that an electronic message that identifies the company officer, the document and the officer’s intention to “sign” the document would be sufficient even if this would not be considered in ordinary circumstances to be their “signature” of an electronic document. That said, in most circumstances “signing” the actual electronic document would be the preferable approach.
The Commonwealth Government is to be commended for implementing these measures. They overcome practical problems created by the COVID-19 pandemic and related lockdown and social distancing measures.
It is hoped that in due course these measures will become permanent features of the Australian Corporations Act, to facilitate virtual meetings and electronic execution on an ongoing basis.
Be the first to receive the latest articles, news and publications.
Regulators and investigative bodies have extensive powers that can be brought to bear upon your corporation. Your corporation might come in contact with a regulator in the course of a voluntary...
If a regulator issues a warrant it is a serious matter. Typically, a warrant will only be sought after approval at senior levels within a regulator and can only be issued by a Magistrate or Justice...
Overall, the new s674A will not materially alter the approach that directors should adopt in seeking to have the company comply with its obligations and discharge the directors’ own duties. It is...