Sentences with phrase «ownership legal structures»

This guide will help you better understand beneficial ownership legal structures and their complexities.

Not exact matches

Important factors that may affect the Company's business and operations and that may cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward - looking statements include, but are not limited to, operating in a highly competitive industry; changes in the retail landscape or the loss of key retail customers; the Company's ability to maintain, extend and expand its reputation and brand image; the impacts of the Company's international operations; the Company's ability to leverage its brand value; the Company's ability to predict, identify and interpret changes in consumer preferences and demand; the Company's ability to drive revenue growth in its key product categories, increase its market share, or add products; an impairment of the carrying value of goodwill or other indefinite - lived intangible assets; volatility in commodity, energy and other input costs; changes in the Company's management team or other key personnel; the Company's ability to realize the anticipated benefits from its cost savings initiatives; changes in relationships with significant customers and suppliers; the execution of the Company's international expansion strategy; tax law changes or interpretations; legal claims or other regulatory enforcement actions; product recalls or product liability claims; unanticipated business disruptions; the Company's ability to complete or realize the benefits from potential and completed acquisitions, alliances, divestitures or joint ventures; economic and political conditions in the United States and in various other nations in which we operate; the volatility of capital markets; increased pension, labor and people - related expenses; volatility in the market value of all or a portion of the derivatives we use; exchange rate fluctuations; risks associated with information technology and systems, including service interruptions, misappropriation of data or breaches of security; the Company's ability to protect intellectual property rights; impacts of natural events in the locations in which we or the Company's customers, suppliers or regulators operate; the Company's indebtedness and ability to pay such indebtedness; the Company's ownership structure; the impact of future sales of its common stock in the public markets; the Company's ability to continue to pay a regular dividend; changes in laws and regulations; restatements of the Company's consolidated financial statements; and other factors.

Partnerships - This is a lesson I have used with my GCSE classes when introducing different business ownership forms and legal structures for the first time.

In the event that a change in legal structure (e.g., Sole Proprietor to incorporated) or changes in ownership of a business occurs, transfer of points to the Scotiabank credit card replacement account that earns points will be allowed.

Last year, the Canadian Bar Association released its Futures report, which boldly proposed: «Lawyers should be allowed to practise in business structures that permit fee - sharing, multidisciplinary practice, and ownership, management, and investment by persons other than lawyers or other regulated legal professionals.»

Washington State is now the first state [1] to allow alternative business structures (ABSs), whereby non-lawyers are authorized to share fees with lawyers and have ownership interests in law firms via the recently approved Limited License Legal Technician (LLLT) Rules of Professional Conduct (RPC).

A liberalized structure allows for people who want to be pure legal technicians to be pure legal technicians, without needing to be rainmakers or to be business managers, and still enjoy share ownership.

Most controversial among these is the proposal that «lawyers should be allowed to practise in business structures that permit fee - sharing, multidisciplinary practice, and ownership, management, and investment by persons other than lawyers or other regulated legal professionals,» in other words, alternative business structures.

Nonlawyer ownership would simply increase the percentage of vultures in the ownership structure of the legal profession — a very bad thing.

The UK and Australia allow for different legal business structures, more specifically they allow for non-licensee ownership and surprisingly with little repercussions.

Andy Daws, Riverview's vice-president North America, says the 2007 Legal Services Act, which was designed to promote competition, innovation and the public and consumer interest, has made the U.K. «the world's legal laboratory right now,» where experiments in ownership structure, service delivery, and alternative business models are being carried out, with varying degrees of sucLegal Services Act, which was designed to promote competition, innovation and the public and consumer interest, has made the U.K. «the world's legal laboratory right now,» where experiments in ownership structure, service delivery, and alternative business models are being carried out, with varying degrees of suclegal laboratory right now,» where experiments in ownership structure, service delivery, and alternative business models are being carried out, with varying degrees of success.

But it is the innovation of: (1) alternative legal services that cut costs by cutting the competence of the people who deliver the legal services; (2) the commercialization and industrial production of legal services (such as, LegalX, LegalZoom, LegalZoom (Canada), Axiom, and, Neota Logic); and, (3) of ownership of law firms by investors referred to as, «alternative business structures.»

These alternative business structures include non-lawyer ownership of firms, as well as «one - stop shop» structures that include a range of professional services, legal and otherwise, for clients.

As long as the legal profession (whatever ownership structures are permitted) is regulated, as long as the consumer is protected, as long as the same professional standards apply — as they do in Australia and the UK — then what are the real objections that should be allowed to stand in the way of making the legal system more accessible?

Globally, there is a strong trend towards opening up legal markets and liberalizing ownership structures.

Lawyers should be allowed to practise in business structures that permit fee - sharing, multidisciplinary practice, and ownership, management, and investment by persons other than lawyers or other regulated legal professionals.

We provide general business legal advice, assist in structuring and implementing major transactions, prepare agreements to address unique business arrangements and consult with clients to resolve major business and ownership issues.

And the ACEDS opportunity came to me and I thought at this point in the legal profession, where we're thinking about multidisciplinary practice, where we're thinking about having different ownership structures like in England, and licensing other professionals — what they call the pejorative non lawyer folks to do legal functions — that this was an opportunity for me to contribute.

There has been a lot of debate over what adverse effects alternative business structures and ownership models will have on the core values of the legal profession, including lawyer independence, client confidentiality, and the duties owed by lawyers to a client — particularly the duty to avoid conflicts of interest.

As McCarthy Tetrault General Counsel Malcolm Mercer pointed out to me and members of the Canadian Association for Legal Ethics on our listerv,» the approval of nearly 50 ABSs [Alternative Business Structures]... in England and Wales in 2012 (with the counterpoints of [the ABA's Ethics 2020 Commission] electing to do nothing on the issue in the US and New South Wales in Australia having permitted non-lawyer ownership of ILPs [Incorporated Legal Practices] for the last decade without a «fitness to own» requirement) is important context and perhaps impetus for Canada».

The paper observes that the empirical evidence does support the claim that «non-lawyer ownership can, in some circumstances, lead to new innovation in legal services, greater competition, larger economies of scale, and new compensation structures».

Creating special legal structures (including 501 (c)(2) and 501 (c)(25) title holding corporations that are available only to tax - exempt owners) to insulate the investor against liabilities arising from real property ownership and evaluating the restrictions on property eligible to be owned by such entities

• Identify key risks or mitigating factors of potential investments, including professional reputations, asset values and types, industry segments, legal and ownership structures, and customer bases.

* If the transaction involved beneficial ownership structures, that corporate records were obtained and retained showing the beneficial ownership of all the entities right through to share ownership of a natural person (not just legal person).