• news-banner

    Expert Insights

Takeover Panel confirms narrowing of Takeover Code jurisdiction: Key Changes Set for February 2025

On 6 November 2024, the Takeover Panel (the Panel) published its response statement (RS 2024/1) confirming the impending changes to the jurisdictional scope of the Takeover Code (the Code) which are set to take effect on 3 February 2025. This update follows the initial consultation that took place in April (PCP 2024/1) which proposed narrowing the jurisdictional scope of the Code; the details of which were covered in Takeover Panel consults on narrowing the scope of the Takeover Code.

The Panel's announcement largely adheres to the proposals outlined in the April draft, with a notable amendment being the transitional arrangements in place for affected companies. Originally set at three years, the Panel has now decided to reduce this period to two years. During this period, such transition companies can explore alternative arrangements, such as amending their articles of association, to provide shareholders with comparable protections to the Code. This run off period also allows shareholders to digest the implications of their from no longer benefiting from the protections afforded by the Code and, if necessary, exit their investments.

What this means for companies subject to the Code

The following table provides a snapshot of the application of the Code up to implementation, during the transition period and following the transition period.

Up to 2 February 2025 (before the implementation date) During 3 February 2025 – 2 February 2027 (the transition period (“TP”)) From 3 February 2027 (following the transition period)
Company status Is the company and Code company? Is the Company and Code Company? Company status Is the company and Code company?
UK quoted Yes

Yes

If the company ceases to be UK quoted during TP, it will be come subject to new 2-year run-off

Remains UK quoted Yes
UK quoted for less than 2 years prior to 3 February 2027 Yes (for 2 years from ceasing to be UK quoted)
Public or private company that ceased to be UK quoted less than 2 years prior to 3 February 2025 Yes, if UK resident 

Transition company, subject to the transitional arrangements. Residency test still applicable, so:

  • Yes, Code company if UK resident at the time of transaction
  • No, not a Code company if not UK resident at the time of transaction
Ceased to be UK quoted more than 2 years prior to 3 February 2027 No
No, if not UK resident

Public or private company that ceased to be UK quoted 2-10 years prior to 3 February 2025;

Public company that was never UK quoted; or

Private company in the 10-year run-off period

Yes, if UK resident 

Transition company, subject to the transitional arrangements. Residency test still applicable, so until earlier of end of: (i) TP and (ii) 10-year run-off:

  • Yes, Code company if UK resident at time of transaction
  • No, not a Code company if not UK resident at time of transaction
Ceased to be UK quoted more than 2 years prior or has never been UK quoted No
No, if not UK resident

Implication of the changes to the Code

The amendments to the Code represent a significant shift in simplification of the Code’s applicability criteria. By providing clarity and reducing the scope of applicability, the Panel has taken a step towards a more efficient and targeted regulatory regime that serves better the needs of the market. The Panel's decision to reduce the run-off period reflects a balance between the need for regulatory oversight and the desire to streamline and simplify the jurisdictional scope of the Code. This change is likely to be welcomed by many, as it reduces the duration of uncertainty for companies that have restructured or changed their corporate structure.

As previously commented in April, the changes are expected to be welcomed by many as it seeks to address criticism that the Code’s current jurisdictional rules are too complex and onerous, leaving it difficult for both market participants and companies to ascertain whether or not the Code is applicable. As the implementation date approaches, it is crucial that affected companies review their status and prepare accordingly.

Our thinking

  • Seminar: National Association of Independent Administrators

    Events

  • The Times quotes Henry Fea on the potential options available to farmers to minimise inheritance tax bills

    Henry Fea

    In the Press

  • Modernising Business Tenancies – the end of security of tenure?

    Andrew Ross

    Insights

  • Switzerland – Obtaining Civil Remedies in Criminal Cases

    Pierre Bydzovsky

    Insights

  • The UK’s Autumn 2024 Budget: good news for British ex-pats

    Lisa-Jane Dupernex

    Insights

  • The April 2026 changes to Agricultural and Business Property Relief

    Sarah Wray

    Insights

  • Clarifying the complexities of APR and IHT for family farms: a prime time fact-check analysis

    Henry Fea

    Quick Reads

  • The future of IHT planning with pensions

    Harriet Betteridge

    Quick Reads

  • Investment Treaty Arbitration – An Overview

    Thomas R. Snider

    Insights

  • The eVisa rollout – what do employers need to do?

    Rose Carey

    Insights

  • Investing in Africa’s digital economy – the brink of a digital revolution

    Nnamdi Nwokedi

    Quick Reads

  • Ensure you can return to the UK in 2025 – navigating the eVisa rollout

    Rose Carey

    Insights

  • The Lawyer interviews Karen Stages and David Collins on increasing transparency around the partnership track

    Karen Stages

    In the Press

  • Property Patter: Great Estates Miniseries – part 3 (or where to find excellent cheesecake and chocolate!)

    Emma Humphreys

    Podcasts

  • Citywealth quotes Sally Ashford on the challenges faced by ageing parents with adult children who have mental or physical health issues

    Sally Ashford

    In the Press

  • New Commercial Register Law of Saudi Arabia

    Ahmad Anani

    Insights

  • "AI Battlefields" Conference - Some Highlights

    Nick White

    Quick Reads

  • Julia Cox, Harriet Betteridge and Alexandra Clarke write for Tax Journal on who might be considered the ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ from an IHT perspective following the UK Autumn Budget

    Julia Cox

    In the Press

  • City AM quotes Charlotte Duly on the long-awaited SkyKick v Sky Supreme Court decision

    Charlotte Duly

    In the Press

Back to top