AIM Rules Review consultation - Law Society response
The Law Society and City of London Law Society have submitted a joint response to the London Stock Exchange’s consultation on its review of the Alternative Investments Market (AIM) rules.
We are concerned that the proposed change to AIM Rule 26 requires:
- that an AIM company discloses on its website the recognised corporate governance code that the board has decided to apply
- how the company complies with that code
- if it departs from certain provisions, an explanation of why they have chosen to do so.
We suggest that a more proportionate approach would be for AIM Rule 26 to provide that AIM companies must disclose how they have complied with, or departed from, that code in respect of any financial period for which audited accounts have been published. This would make the disclosure obligation equivalent to that for premium-listed companies.