We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology Newsfeed
  • Blog
  • Events
  • Popular
  • About
  • Login
  • Register
  • Your Basket
  • Blog
  • Events
  • Popular
  • About
  • Login
  • Register
  • Newsfeed
  • Navigator
  • Hubs
  • Webinars
  • Store
  • Analytics
  • Insights
  • Track
  • Create
  • Newsfeed
  • Navigator
  • Hubs
  • Webinars
  • Store
  • Analytics
  • Insights
  • Track
  • Create
Back Forward
  • Save & file
  • View original
  • Forward
  • Share
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Google Plus
    • Linked In
  • Follow
    Please login to follow content.
  • Like

add to folder:

  • My saved (default)
  • Read later

Register now for your free, tailored, daily legal newsfeed service.

Questions? Please contact customerservices@lexology.com

Register

Sweeping changes to Code of Corporate Governance proposed

WongPartnership LLP

To view this article you need a PDF viewer such as Adobe Reader. Download Adobe Acrobat Reader

Singapore June 16 2011

On 14 June 2011, the Monetary Authority of Singapore ("MAS") issued a Consultation Paper on Proposed Revisions to the Code of Corporate Governance ("Consultation").

WongPartnership LLP - Joy Tan and Annabelle Yip
Back Forward
  • Save & file
  • View original
  • Forward
  • Share
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Google Plus
    • Linked In
  • Follow
    Please login to follow content.
  • Like

add to folder:

  • My saved (default)
  • Read later

Filed under

  • Singapore
  • Company & Commercial
  • WongPartnership LLP

Tagged with

  • Corporate governance
  • Monetary Authority of Singapore
  • Consultation (Texas)

Popular articles from this firm

  1. Thanakharn Kasikorn Thai Chamkat (Mahachon) v Akai Holdings Ltd (in liquidation) *
  2. A court must examine the entire factual matrix of the case to determine if the facts show that the beneficiary of an on-demand performance bond had acted unconscionably and without good faith when making a call on the demand, and if it had, the court woul *
  3. Acohs Pty Ltd v Ucorp Pty Ltd [2012] FCAFC 16 *
  4. Pearson & Ors v Lehman Brothers Finance SA & Ors [2010] EWHC 2914 (CH) (England, High Court, 19 November 2010) *
  5. Chandler v Cape Plc [2012] EWCA Civ 525 (England, Court of Appeal, 25 April 2012) *

If you would like to learn how Lexology can drive your content marketing strategy forward, please email enquiries@lexology.com.

Send to Create
Powered by Lexology

Related topic hubs

  1. Corporate governance
  2. Singapore
  3. Company & Commercial

Lexology Navigator Q&A

Compare jurisdictions: Trademarks

  1. Singapore
  2. Brazil
  3. India
  4. More...
Tom Anderson
In-House Counsel
Aveva Inc
What our clients say

“I have found the articles in Lexology/Newsstand to be closely related to the topics I am interested in. The selection feature during registration helps in increasing the relevance of the content of the emails. They’re easy to understand and I appreciate that they are only as long as necessary to cover the essentials. I would recommend it to other attorneys.”

Back to Top
  • RSS feeds
  • Contact
  • Submissions
  • About
  • Terms of use
  • Cookies
  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy policy
  • Login
  • Register
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Search
Globe Business Media Group

© Copyright 2006 - 2018 Globe Business Media Group