moved Amendment No. 490A:"Leave out Clause 763 and insert the following new Clause—"
““REQUIREMENT OF AUTHENTICATION
(1) This section applies in relation to the authentication of a document or information sent or supplied by a person to a company.
(2) A document or information sent or supplied in hard copy form is sufficiently authenticated if it is signed by the person sending or supplying it.
(3) A document or information sent or supplied in electronic form is sufficiently authenticated—
(a) if the identity of the sender is confirmed in a manner specified by the company, or
(b) where no such manner has been specified by the company, if the communication contains or is accompanied by a statement of the identity of the sender and the company has no reason to doubt the truth of that statement.
(4) Where a document or information is sent or supplied by one person on behalf of another, nothing in this section affects any provision of the company’s articles under which the company may require reasonable evidence of the authority of the former to act on behalf of the latter.””
The noble Lord said: My Lords, in moving Amendment No. 490A I shall speak also to Amendments Nos. 490B and 490C. These amendments seek to address the concerns raised by the noble Lords, Lord Hodgson and Lord Sharman, in Grand Committee, relating to two important aspects of the company communications provisions of the Bill.
Amendment No. 490A deals with the authentication of documents by one person on another’s behalf. It makes clear that companies can require proof of authority to act and, in doing so, puts beyond doubt that authentication of documents by one person on another’s behalf is permitted. Amendment No. 490B deals with deemed delivery of website communications and makes additional provision for opting out of default rules about deemed delivery. Amendment No. 490C is a consequential amendment. Clause 765 is what currently deals with deemed delivery. We are bringing the rules on deemed delivery clearly within the company communications provisions of the Bill. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Company Law Reform Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Sainsbury of Turville
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 16 May 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Company Law Reform Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
682 c233-4 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 20:21:34 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_322306
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_322306
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_322306