EDO MBM Fined for Failing To File Accounts
Doug Brewer | 20.11.2007 16:30 | Anti-militarism | Social Struggles | South Coast
Brighton arms company EDO MBM Technology Ltd are three weeks late filing their full accounts for 2006.
That was the year of disaster when they were defeated in the High Court injunction case by anti-arms trade protesters from Brighton, and had to pay out an estimated £1million in legal costs, the equivalent of a whole years profit after reductions.
A spokeperson for Companies House confirmed the lateness of the EDO MBM 2006 filing and said they would impose an automatic £100 penalty.
The longer EDO MBM delay filing the accounts the greater the penalty becomes, reaching £1000 if the delay exceeds one year.
Companies House confirmed that this was the first time in the history of the Brighton arms company that they have failed to file accounts by the deadline of October 31st.
Analysts believe the company are embarrassed by the results which cover the period of the High Court injunction failure and the resulting payout of huge legal costs.
In October this year EDO MBM's UK Holding company EDO (UK) Ltd who boast former MoD Chief of Procurement, Sir Robert Walmsley as Chairman filed accounts showing a 70% profit drop on the previous year.
***
A spokeperson for Companies House confirmed the lateness of the EDO MBM 2006 filing and said they would impose an automatic £100 penalty.
The longer EDO MBM delay filing the accounts the greater the penalty becomes, reaching £1000 if the delay exceeds one year.
Companies House confirmed that this was the first time in the history of the Brighton arms company that they have failed to file accounts by the deadline of October 31st.
Analysts believe the company are embarrassed by the results which cover the period of the High Court injunction failure and the resulting payout of huge legal costs.
In October this year EDO MBM's UK Holding company EDO (UK) Ltd who boast former MoD Chief of Procurement, Sir Robert Walmsley as Chairman filed accounts showing a 70% profit drop on the previous year.
***
Doug Brewer
Additions
companies Act 2006 says...EDO MBM's business is currently unlawful
20.11.2007 18:33
___
Companies Act 2006
Failure to file accounts and reports
451 Default in filing accounts and reports: offences
(1) If the requirements of section 441 (duty to file accounts and reports) are not
complied with in relation to a company’s accounts and reports for a financial
year before the end of the period for filing those accounts and reports, every
person who immediately before the end of that period was a director of the
company commits an offence.
(2) It is a defence for a person charged with such an offence to prove that he took
all reasonable steps for securing that those requirements would be complied
with before the end of that period.
(3) It is not a defence to prove that the documents in question were not in fact
prepared as required by this Part.
(4) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on summary
conviction to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale and, for
continued contravention, a daily default fine not exceeding one-tenth of level
5 on the standard scale.
452 Default in filing accounts and reports: court order
(1) If—
(a) the requirements of section 441 (duty to file accounts and reports) are
not complied with in relation to a company’s accounts and reports for
a financial year before the end of the period for filing those accounts
and reports, and
(b) the directors of the company fail to make good the default within 14
days after the service of a notice on them requiring compliance,
the court may, on the application of any member or creditor of the company or
of the registrar, make an order directing the directors (or any of them) to make
good the default within such time as may be specified in the order.
(2) The court’s order may provide that all costs (in Scotland, expenses) of and
incidental to the application are to be borne by the directors.
453 Civil penalty for failure to file accounts and reports
(1) Where the requirements of section 441 are not complied with in relation to a
company’s accounts and reports for a financial year before the end of the
period for filing those accounts and reports, the company is liable to a civil
penalty.
This is in addition to any liability of the directors under section 451.
(2) The amount of the penalty shall be determined in accordance with regulations
made by the Secretary of State by reference to—
(a) the length of the period between the end of the period for filing the
accounts and reports in question and the day on which the
requirements are complied with, and
(b) whether the company is a private or public company.
(3) The penalty may be recovered by the registrar and is to be paid into the
Consolidated Fund.
(4) It is not a defence in proceedings under this section to prove that the
documents in question were not in fact prepared as required by this Part.
(5) Regulations under this section having the effect of increasing the penalty
payable in any case are subject to affirmative resolution procedure.
Otherwise, the regulations are subject to negative resolution procedure.
db
Comments
Display the following 6 comments