Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 18 Dec 1963

Vol. 57 No. 5

Stock Transfer Bill, 1963: Second and Subsequent Stages.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

This Bill simplifies the procedure for transferring ownership of fully paid-up registered securities in line with the simplification recently introduced in Britain and Northern Ireland. The Dublin Stock Exchange has asked for this legislation to enable uniformity of transfer procedure to be restored throughout Ireland and Britain. At present Irish stockbrokers operate two transfer procedures—the existing procedure for Irish securities and the new simplified procedure for British securities. The reform is desirable in itself and the extension of the simplified procedure to Irish securities will result in considerable saving of time for stockbrokers, banks and registrars of stocks and shares as well as for the investing public. Indeed, the slowness and complexity of the present transfer system has often been cited as a factor which discourages prospective investors. The Bill follows the lines of the British Stock Transfer Act, 1963.

The main provisions governing the new stock transfer procedure are set out in Section 2 of the Bill and are:

(i) a new form of transfer for general use is introduced;

(ii) the person to whom securities are transferred need not in future sign the instrument of transfer;

(iii) the signature of the transferor need not be witnessed; and

(iv) a transferor whose holding has been sold on a stock exchange will not have to execute more than a single transfer form even where parts of the holding have been sold to different buyers. A new form to be executed by the broker is introduced for such cases.

The Bill applies to fully paid-up transferable registered securities. It will not apply, however, to securities carrying a contingent liability, namely, partly paid up shares or securities of a company limited by guarantee or an unlimited company. In the case of the transfer of these shares the present form will continue to be used and the witnessed signatures of both transferor and transferee will continue to be required. This will ensure that shares involving liabilities cannot be transferred to a person without his written consent.

Section 3 provides that the Bill has effect notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any enactment or instrument, such as articles of association, relating to the transfer of securities. The Bill thus amends in respect of fully paid-up shares the share transfer procedure contained in the Companies Bill, 1963. Because of the complexity of the Companies Bill and as the Stock Transfer Bill, which covers a wider range of securities than company shares, introduces a new principle it was considered desirable to have the new transfer system discussed separately. For that reason the Companies Bill was not amended. However, in deference to views expressed in the course of the debate in the Dáil on the Stock Transfer Bill consideration is being given to a suggestion to incorporate in the Companies Bill by way of amendment whatever material of the Stock Transfer Bill is relevant to it.

Section 4 provides against the evasion of stamp duty by means of the circulation of transfers in which the name of the transferee has not been inserted. Power is being taken in Section 5 of the Bill to permit of the amendment of the new transfer forms by way of regulations. Under Section 6 such regulations and also regulations made under Section 1 determining the Stock Exchanges to be recognised for the purpose of the Bill, will be required to be laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas.

At the request of the Dublin Stock Exchange, it is proposed to recognise all the Stock Exchanges recognised in Britain in the corresponding British Order. The Bill was welcomed in the Dáil for the simplified procedures it introduced. I am sure that it will also recommend itself to this House.

I wish to express the approval of this side of the House of this Bill. It has been introduced to keep the form of transfer of paid-up stock here in line with the transfer form which is being used in England, following the British Stock Transfer Act of 1963. Of course it is highly desirable that the same forms should be used here as are acceptable on the British Stock Exchange and it is certainly very desirable that there should not be any more difficulty in transferring stock here than there is in England.

I personally welcome the provision in the Bill which dispenses with the necessity for the transferee to sign the transfer because it does happen from time to time that a person in America or some other place gives instructions to invest money here and if it is necessary he should sign the transfer, it becomes necessary then to send the transfer out to some foreign country, and it might come back not properly completed unless he gives it to some professional man out there. That is done away with here. Of course a signature is still necessary.

I am glad to hear from the Minister that he has considered carefully representations made in the other House concerning the alteration of the Companies Bill which has just become law. This Bill as it stands would seek to change that Act which was only recently passed. That would be a great mistake, because the Companies Bill came to us as a result, first of all, of a very lengthy session by the Company Law Reform Committee, who sat for several years.

Some years after that Committee presented their report, the Companies Bill was introduced in the Dáil and there it got a very patient and a very constructive hearing and was dealt with by a Special Committee as a non-controversial measure. It came to this House as, we thought, a Bill which could not be very much improved upon, but nevertheless a Select Committee was set up and some of the amendments suggested here were accepted by the Minister in the spirit in which they were put down.

It would, therefore, be a tragedy that the good work done should be undone and that the form which has been just newly prescribed in the Companies Bill should be done away with by a separate measure known as the Stock Transfer Bill, 1963. I understand that some months ago the Stock Transfer Act became law in England, that it was apparent then that a similar Bill would be necessary here and a question was put down in the other House asking what steps the Government proposed to take to bring the law here into line with the law in England. If these Bills could have been introduced at the same time in the other House, there would not have been the disadvantage of having the Companies Bill altered so quickly by an independent measure.

At any rate, I am glad the Minister has consented to reconsider the matter. I believe that an offer was made in the Dáil that a one-line amending Bill would be given to him in a matter of minutes in the Dáil, if he accepted it, in order to avoid the undesirable situation I have mentioned. I trust that the Minister will now accept that offer and that he will not spoil the good work of consolidation done by the other Bill.

The only matter that arose here was this matter of the amendment of the Companies Bill. I should like to put it to Senators that it is not, perhaps, as important an issue as it might appear. It would not have been necessary to put in this amendment in this Bill if the Companies Bill had become law a day before this Bill was brought before the Dáil because a clause in this Bill says that these sections shall apply, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any enactment—that is how it stood—including the law in relation to the transfer of these securities.

If the Companies Bill had been law before this, that could have stood and everything would have been right but there was the peculiar position that the Companies Bill had been passed by the Dáil but not actually signed, and then there was a certain doubt on the part of the draftsman that it might not apply until the Act was actually brought into operation, because, I understand, the Companies Bill is brought into operation by an order of the Minister. On account of that uncertainty, it was thought well to put in this amendment.

The Minister for Industry and Commerce, of course, is responsible for the Companies Bill and I am quite sure he would like to have that consolidation measure there as long as possible without amendment. I put to him the opinion in the Dáil and said that he could probably bring in an amending consolidation Bill; that I presumed it would go through both Houses without very much discussion; and that if that were done before a new Bill was translated and printed, it would not give rise to very much extra trouble. The Minister for Industry and Commerce is considering that matter and it is for him to decide. My duty in relation to this Bill is over and done with. It is for him to decide whether he would like to have his Bill amended in the way suggested.

Question put and agreed to.
Agreed to take remaining Stages today.
Bill considered in Committee.
Sections 1 and 2 agreed to.
SECTION 3.
Question proposed: "That Section 3 stand part of the Bill."

Arising out of what the Minister has said, I should like to ask him is it not a fact that if this Bill had been introduced in conjunction with the Companies Bill, the situation complained of would not have arisen and could have been avoided?

I do not know. It is a legal point on which I should not like to express an opinion. As I told the House, the draftsman advised me that as the Companies Bill was not law and would probably not be law by the time this Bill went through the Seanad, he thought it advisable to put in this amendment. If it were law, he thought it would not be necessary, he said.

Question put and agreed to.
Sections 4 to 7, inclusive, agreed to.
First and Second Schedules agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported without amendment, received for final consideration and passed.
Top
Share