operated so as to seek to ensure the
broadest possible ownership within
Chambers (without ownership being
compulsory) and avoiding a large
proportion of the property being held
by a small number of (generally more
senior) members.
It is undesirable to effectively exclude
junior members by setting the price to
buy in at too high a level. Furthermore,
if shares in the scheme are too
concentrated in the hands of a small
number of investors, if those investors
leave Chambers or decide to sell their
shares around the same time, this could
jeopardise the viability of the scheme. If
there is insufficient demand to take up
those shares it could lead to the sale of
the property.
There is no easy solution here. There
are operational steps which can be taken
to facilitate widespread ownership (for
example, giving preference to those
with small or no holding in the property
when shares are available for transfer),
but, particularly if Chambers is relying
on certain well-resourced individuals to
enable a purchase to occur, it is difficult
to escape the economic reality that
acquiring property is expensive and
higher earners are likely to find it easier
to participate.
David Webster, Partner in the
Corporate and Commercial Team at
Russell-Cooke
The barrister magazine
cannot accept responsibility
for information supplied
by other parties, views
expressed may not
necessarily be that of
the editor or publishers.
the barrister Hilary Term 2016
barmag67.indd 19
19
03/12/2015 10:21