Family businesses—governance

Family constitution

Successful family businesses are different in many ways, but they have at least one thing in common; they are well organised. Their success is achieved through thoughtful planning and part of this organised approach often involves creating a family constitution. Other names that are used for ‘family constitution’ include family charter or family creed or family protocol.

Some family constitutions are intended by families to have moral, rather than legal force. However, the family constitution may contain provisions about ownership and other matters that the family want to be legally binding. In such cases, there is a need for some convergence between the family constitution and other forms of legal agreements.

Some families introduce sanctions for breach of a family constitution. For further guidance, see Practice Note: Family businesses—the family constitution.

Family governance

A family business that has no formal structures and policies in place does not completely lack governance. There is always a ‘natural’ or ‘organic’ governance system based on understandings, assumptions and expectations that everyone in the family and in the business adheres to as ‘the way we do things around here’.

Formal

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Private Client News

Private Client weekly highlights—21 November 2024

This week’s edition of Private Client highlights includes: (1) Wigglesworth v Beetson, in which the claimant failed in an action for estoppel and adverse possession; (2) the Hansard Society to host a briefing on parliamentary process for Assisted Dying Bill; (3) Khan v Khan, which considered family property and constructive trusts; (4) analysis of the Autumn Budget announcement to bring unused pension funds and death benefits within the scope of IHT; (5) Palmer v Sans, which found that there was no transaction at an undervalue where property was already held on trust for the transferee; (6) KA v FA (The Secretary of State for the Home Department intervening), where the court recognised an overseas adoption notwithstanding failure of common law test; and (7) Kireeva v Bedzhamov, in which the Supreme Court has confirmed the application of the immovables rule to English property.

HoL committee issues call for evidence on Property (Digital Assets etc) Bill

A Special Public Bill Committee established by the House of Lords has issued a call for evidence on the Property (Digital Assets etc) Bill. The deadline for submissions is Friday 20 December 2024.

Privy Council rules BVI company shares are not immovable property (Al Thani v Al Thani)

Private Client analysis: In a decision which will come as a relief to private individuals who own shares in BVI companies, the Privy Council has decided that section 245 of the BVI’s Business Companies Act 2004 does not have the effect of re-categorising shares as immovable property for the purposes of succession. Written by Kyle Bonnell, pupil at XXIV Old Buildings.

Supreme Court confirms application of immovables rule to English property

The Supreme Court has unanimously dismissed Ms Kireeva’s (Russian bankruptcy trustee’s) appeal to overturn the Court of Appeal’s’ decision regarding matters arising out of the bankruptcy of Mr Bedzhamov. Peter Declercq and Patrick Elliot, partners at DCQ Legal (who acted for Ms Kireeva), discuss the implications of the judgment.