Legal opinion for formation of a public company Coursework

Legal opinion for formation of a public company - Coursework Example Before the company starts its business, it must have allotted shares whose minimum value should be at least 50, 000 pounds. A quarter of the shares should be paid up; this amounts to ?12, 500. For each of the allotted shares, up to the last quarter of its nominal value has to be paid up as well as any premium (Companies House, 2012). The other procedure in the formation of a public company includes the choosing of directors of the company. Several requirements have to be followed when choosing the company directors. One of the requirements is that the person should not be disqualified by law from becoming a director or be bankrupt. The maximum age of directors that was previously seventy years has been removed. During the formation of the company, the minimum age required for company directors is sixteen years. The directors of the company should then select few names (four) that are suitable enough and indicate the company’s objective (Companies House, 2012). One of the four names selected will become the main name while the three others have to be mentioned in their order of preference. The directors should then make an application to the registrar of companies to ascertain whether the selected names are appropriate. Once the names go through, the next step includes the drafting of the memorandum of associations and articles of association. The authorized share capital of the proposed public company should then be declared and be in line with the minimum paid up capital required in forming a public company. The next step involves filing a declaration and attaching the statement in lieu of the prospectus. Once the company is through with these steps, it will obtain a certificate that will enable it to commence business. Shares will be floated through an initial public offering, which states the price per share and the minimum and maximum number of shares that can be held by shareholders (Companies House, 2012). How the courts distinguish between contrac ts of service and contracts for services and the importance of this distinction. The law distinguishes between a contract of service and a contract for services. A contract of service refers to an agreement, which may either be verbal or written, implied or expressed. In this contract, a person makes an agreement employ another person as an employee while the employed person makes an agreement to serve the employer. An example of a contract of service includes an apprenticeship agreement or contract. On the other hand, contracts for services refer to independent contractors and sub-contractors. In differentiating between a contract of service and contracts for services, courts apply such tests as integration and control (Barendrecht 2007, p. 151). The test of integration looks at the extent to which the work of the employee may be said to be integrated into business. The control test explores the question on whether the employer can tell the employee what they ought to do. Other tes ts applied by the courts in the distinction between contracts of services and contracts for services include mixed or multiple tests. These tests question whether the agreement or engagement has wages, holiday pay, and sick pay. The courts state that these tests ask whether PAYE and PRSI are deducted. According to the courts, these multiple and mixed tests should also look at whether