[et_pb_section fb_built=\u00bb1″ _builder_version=\u00bb4.0.6″ collapsed=\u00bboff\u00bb][et_pb_row _builder_version=\u00bb4.0.6″ background_size=\u00bbinitial\u00bb background_position=\u00bbtop_left\u00bb background_repeat=\u00bbrepeat\u00bb width=\u00bb91%\u00bb custom_padding=\u00bb0px|||||\u00bb collapsed=\u00bboff\u00bb][et_pb_column type=\u00bb4_4″ _builder_version=\u00bb3.25″ custom_padding=\u00bb|||\u00bb custom_padding__hover=\u00bb|||\u00bb][et_pb_text _builder_version=\u00bb4.0.6″ text_font=\u00bbOpen Sans||||||||\u00bb text_font_size=\u00bb16px\u00bb header_2_text_color=\u00bb#002b52″ header_2_line_height=\u00bb1.1em\u00bb background_size=\u00bbinitial\u00bb background_position=\u00bbtop_left\u00bb background_repeat=\u00bbrepeat\u00bb hover_enabled=\u00bb0″]<\/p>\n
Luis Sanchez,<\/strong> Director of the Corporate Department of Medina Cuadros<\/strong> in Granada, participated in a round table discussion at the Law School of<\/strong> the Andalusian city, organized by the Professional Association of the Judiciary<\/strong> (APM), where he made an in-depth analysis of the remuneration of the Executive Directors<\/strong> in light of the Supreme Court of 26 February 2018.<\/strong><\/p>\n This "controversial"<\/strong><\/em> Sentence, as developed Luis S\u00e1nchez<\/strong> at the beginning of his speech: \u00abhe considered, contrary to the majority doctrine, that the compensation of the Chief Executive Officers should be subject, cumulatively, to the requirements demanded of the administrators, in their condition as such<\/strong>\u00ab,<\/em> all of this in the article 217 of the Capital Companies Law.<\/strong><\/p>\n Luis Sanchez<\/strong> continued his presentation by explaining that \u00abto date, it has been held that the Chief Executive Officers or Executive Directors<\/strong> were only required to abide by the provisions of the The Company's Board of Directors<\/strong> is required to sign a contract between the Company and the Chief Executive Officer or Executive, with a reinforced majority of 2\/3, with the affected party abstaining from participating in the debate and approval of the contract. copy of said contract\u00bb.<\/strong><\/p>\n The Director of<\/strong> the Granada office, detailed in this round table, that the Supreme Court,<\/strong> with the Judgment of February 26, 2018, considers that along with these requirements, the requirements of the administrator,<\/strong> in its
\n status as such,<\/em>
\n<\/strong> \u00abso it must have its The bylaws reflect the methods and bases of remuneration<\/strong>, including this provision or any other that may be adopted by the Company. General Meeting\u00bb.<\/strong><\/p>\n