Halvorsen & Reith

Board delegation and reserved matters for private company boards

Board delegation and reserved matters decide who inside a company can bind it, and who cannot, once day-to-day decision-making has been pushed down to management or a committee. A board that has never written this down finds out the hard way, usually when a bank, an investor or a court asks for the resolution that authorised a decision and no such resolution exists. This work sets the boundary in writing, before a counterparty forces the question.

A board delegates operational sign-off to a chief executive, adds a finance director to a bank mandate, and moves on. Two years later an investor's counsel asks for the minute recording that delegation and for the list of matters the board reserved to itself. Neither document can be found, and the closing is delayed while the company reconstructs, after the fact, a decision it should have recorded at the time.

This page sets out when a delegation has to be documented, what a reserved matters schedule has to cover, and what the engagement produces to put both on a footing a bank, an auditor or a counterparty will accept.

The situation this work addresses

Most private companies delegate long before anyone writes down what has actually been delegated. A managing director signs contracts up to an informal limit, a finance function approves payments, and the board meets to note decisions rather than to take them. That arrangement works until someone outside the company needs to rely on it: a bank testing signing authority, a counterparty checking whether a signatory had power to bind the company, or an investor's counsel reviewing the constitutional documents ahead of a funding round. At that point an informal practice has to be shown as an authorised one, and the company that cannot show it loses time it had not budgeted for.

The same gap shows up inside a cross-border structure for a different reason. A holding company sits above operating subsidiaries in several jurisdictions, including structures set up in centres such as the one covered on this jurisdiction-specific page, and the group wants consistent rules on what a local board can decide and what has to go up to the parent. Without a written delegation and a reserved matters schedule, each subsidiary board improvises its own version, and the group discovers the inconsistency only when two subsidiaries in the same transaction give different answers to the same lender.

What triggers it and why the timing matters

Four events reliably bring this to a head. A financing round in which a new investor asks for board rights and wants to know exactly what the board can decide without consulting it. A restructuring that adds or removes a layer between the parent and an operating company, changing who is actually accountable for a decision. The departure of an executive who held informal authority that was never written into a delegation instrument. And a dispute, internal or external, in which someone asks the board to prove that a decision was taken by the person authorised to take it.

The timing point is not abstract. A board resolution passed to approve a transaction, but never checked against a reserved matters schedule that in fact required shareholder approval for that class of transaction, is a defect that runs from the date the resolution was passed, not from the date anyone noticed the problem. Once the transaction it supported has completed and third parties have relied on it, the window to cure the defect through a straightforward ratification closes with it, and what remains afterwards is a harder retrospective fix that a counterparty may simply decline to accept.

Six months of delegating decisions without a written schedule rarely causes a problem on its own. What changes the calculus is an external party stepping in, which is precisely when the absence of paperwork stops being an internal inconvenience and becomes a transaction risk that someone else is pricing.

What board delegation and reserved matters work produces, in sequence

The output of this work is a small number of documents, produced in an order that matters because each one depends on the one before it.

First, a review of the current constitutional documents and any existing board or shareholder resolutions bearing on authority, to establish what has actually been agreed rather than what people assume has been agreed. Second, a reserved matters schedule: the defined list of decisions that stay with the board or the shareholders and cannot be delegated, drafted against the structure's actual governance rather than a generic template. Third, a delegation instrument setting out what management, a committee or a named officer may decide, and the financial, subject-matter or time limits attached to that authority. Fourth, a board pack recording the resolution that adopts both documents, in a form that will stand up if a bank, an auditor or a court asks to see it later. A related question - what a newly appointed director needs before taking office - is addressed separately in the director induction pack, which this work often runs alongside.

Where the group spans more than one jurisdiction, the sequence is run once at parent level and once, adapted, in each operating jurisdiction, because a schedule drafted for one board's constitution rarely transfers without amendment to another. A separate note on the resolutions this typically generates is set out in this companion piece.

Where this differs by jurisdiction

The underlying question - what a board may decide without going back to the shareholders - is answered differently depending on the legal tradition a jurisdiction sits in, and the difference matters more than most groups expect.

In jurisdictions built on a strong constitutional-document tradition, the company's own articles or equivalent constitution do most of the work: the reserved matters schedule sits inside, or alongside, a document the company drafted and can amend itself. In jurisdictions where a supervisory or dual-board structure is common, some matters that a single board could decide elsewhere sit instead with a separate body by default, and delegation has to be built around that structure rather than against it. In a number of offshore corporate centres the constitution is deliberately thin and almost everything is left to the board's own resolutions, which makes the discipline of writing a clear schedule more important, not less. Getting this wrong is rarely only an internal governance failure; where the delegated activity itself is licensed, treating a reserved matter as delegated turns an internal slip into regulatory exposure for whoever signed.

What stays constant across jurisdictions is timing rather than substance. Many corporate registries treat the date of a resolution, not the date it happens to be filed or written up, as the point from which its authority runs. A delegation adopted informally and only reduced to writing once a dispute has already started carries a later date than the decisions it purports to authorise, and the ability to have that delegation stand behind an earlier decision, rather than only from the date it is finally signed, ceases to be available once that later date has passed. No amount of careful drafting after the fact moves it back.

For a structure spanning several jurisdictions, comparative points such as those set out in this comparison of director requirements are a starting point, not an answer: a matter safely delegated at parent level is not automatically delegable at subsidiary level, and share transfer restrictions of the kind discussed in this note on transfer restrictions illustrate how a constitution can limit authority in ways a generic delegation policy overlooks entirely. The two should never be assumed to match without checking the local constitutional documents directly.

What this service does not include

This engagement does not include acting as a director, company secretary, nominee shareholder or trustee for the structure, and it does not include supplying, sourcing or introducing anyone to fill those roles. It also does not include any activity that requires a trust or corporate service provider licence, such as administering the company's own registers or acting as its registered agent.

The boundary is not a matter of preference. Providing those functions, or arranging for someone else to provide them, requires a licence a law firm does not hold, and a firm that blurred the line would be carrying out exactly the kind of unlicensed activity this work is often engaged to help a client avoid. What the client receives instead is the analysis: the reserved matters mapped against the actual constitution, delegation limits set at a level the board can defend, the appointment terms of anyone taking on delegated authority reviewed before they sign, and the exposure that follows the board and named individuals assessed in writing.

Frequently asked questions

How often should board delegation and reserved matters be reviewed?
There is no fixed interval that applies to every company, so the honest answer is: whenever the structure it was built for changes. A financing round, a change of directors, or the addition of a subsidiary in another jurisdiction is each, on its own, a reason to check the schedule again rather than waiting for an annual cycle that may fall at the wrong moment.
Does board delegation and reserved matters change for a foreign-owned company?
The mechanics do not change because the parent sits abroad, but the practical stakes do. A foreign parent relying on a subsidiary board to run day-to-day operations needs the reserved matters schedule to state, precisely, which decisions still have to come back to it, because a local director acting on an assumption about parent approval is exposed personally if that assumption turns out to be wrong.
What does board delegation and reserved matters require in practice?
It requires two documents that work together: a schedule of what the board or shareholders keep for themselves, and an instrument setting out what everyone else may decide and within what limits. Treating either one as a formality, rather than as the document a bank or a court will actually read, is the most common reason boards later find themselves unable to answer a straightforward question about who approved what.
Who inside the company is responsible for board delegation and reserved matters?
Formal responsibility sits with the board as a whole, not with the individual director who happens to hold the pen. Delegating that responsibility informally to one director or to management, without the board itself adopting the schedule by resolution, leaves the delegation exposed to challenge precisely when it is relied upon.
What evidence should the board keep on board delegation and reserved matters?
At minimum, the resolution adopting the reserved matters schedule and the delegation instrument, dated and signed, kept alongside the constitutional documents rather than filed separately from them. Anything less leaves the company reconstructing, from memory, a decision that should have been on file from the outset.

A structure that has grown past the point where informal delegation is safe rarely announces the fact. It shows up first as a question from someone outside the company that the board cannot answer cleanly, and by then the fix costs more than the review would have.

The engagement produces the schedule, the instrument, the board pack and a written view of where personal exposure currently sits, in that order, so the board is never explaining a decision after the fact again.

Review your appointment terms

Write to info@hreithlaw.com with the jurisdiction and the structure.

Marit Halvorsen Reith, expert author, focuses on board structure and cross-border governance for private company groups. She works with boards and general counsel on delegation, reserved matters and the allocation of authority between parent and subsidiary boards. Her writing concentrates on the point at which informal governance stops working for a growing or restructuring group.

By Emil Rask