º£½ÇÊÓÆµ

Oops.

Our website is temporarily unavailable in your location.

We are working hard to get it back online.

PRIVACY
Enterprise

Director at crisis-hit Go-Ahead steps down after vote to re-elect him was counted wrongly

The vote against Adrian Ewer came as the company tries to deal with the crisis surrounding its LSER rail franchise

A Southeastern train(Image: Copyright Unknown)

A director of crisis-hit transport company Go-Ahead has had to step down after the company was told that his narrow re-election was a mistake.

The Newcastle-based rail and bus firm has been plunged into crisis in recent months after it admitted last year that it had not declared £25m of funding relating to the London & South Eastern Railway (LSER) contract.

The company is facing a fine from the Government and has had to suspend trading of its shares after being unable to meet a deadline to file its financial results, which had already been delayed once before.

Read more : go here for more North East business news

Shareholders vented their frustration at Go-Ahead’s AGM just before Christmas by voting 47% against the re-election of director Adrian Ewer, who had been senior independent director and chair of the company’s audit committee.

But now it has revealed that an error by its registrar meant that 3.2m proxy votes submitted by shareholders had not been counted. Taking those votes into account, Mr Ewer would have been voted out at the AGM and so he has now left the board.

Go-Ahead’s statement said: “The company has been informed by its registrar, Equiniti, that they have discovered an error in the collection of certain proxy votes submitted in relation to the resolutions put to shareholders at the Annual General Meeting held on 21 December 2021. As a result of Equiniti’s error, approximately 3.2m proxy votes validly submitted by shareholders were not included in the vote count produced by the registrar.

“Had these votes been included in the vote count, Resolution 4 to re-elect Adrian Ewer as a director of the company would have received fewer than 50% of votes in favour and, therefore, he would not have been re-elected as a director of the company. The outcomes in relation to the other resolutions put to the AGM would not have been affected by this error and those resolutions would still have been approved by the requisite majority of shareholders.