Assessment task details and instructions
The UK Stewardship Code 2020 states that “The investment market has changed significantly
since the publication of the first UK Stewardship Code”. Identify how the investment market has
changed since the first Code was introduced in 2012 and the consequent changes that have
been made in the 2020 Code. How effective do you think the new Code will be in improving the
performance of institutional investors and protecting the interests of the investors that they
In this essay-style assignment you are expected to look beyond UK case law and legislation.
Review the teaching materials on shareholders generally and institutional shareholders in
particular, as well as information specifically related to the UK Stewardship Code. As well as legal
analysis, you should consider fully the political, technological, philosophical and economic
implications of the debate over institutional shareholders and the concept of stewardship.
Read carefully both the written and online guides to the Oscola referencing. Improper
referencing results in lower marks.
Your answer must be word-processed using Microsoft Word. All assessments must be written in
Arial or Calibri font, 12pt with 1.5 spacing. Please put page numbers at the bottom of your
On successful completion of this assessment, you will be able to:
Knowledge and Understanding.
1. Demonstrate an advanced and detailed knowledge and understanding of the fundamental
legal concepts that characterise corporate identity and activity in a global context;
2. Describe, and critically evaluate, both theoretically and in practice, different regional models
of corporate law & governance;
3. Operate professionally, ethically and with cultural awareness in a global corporate context.
Practical, Professional or Subject Specific Skills
4. Advise on legal and regulatory matters
5. Produce a report on legal issues for a business client
Transferable/Key Skills and other Attributes.
6. Work in teams to clarify objectives, exchange ideas and knowledge and evaluate the
contributions of others in constructing cogent and persuasive arguments in response to the
issues and problems posed;
7. Locate and synthesise information from a range of published literature and electronic
sources and present this effectively in oral, written and other media;
Take responsibility for their personal learning and continuous professional development
1. To provide students with an advanced and critically analytical knowledge and understanding
of the fundamental legal concepts that characterise corporate identity and activity in a
2. To provide students with an advanced and analytical knowledge of the theoretical
framework underpinning corporate governance theories and strategies, and the varied
approaches to their regulation;
3. To apply in a comparative manner these concepts of corporate identity and corporate
governance to at least two regional models of corporate governance (indicatively from
Anglo-American, Western European and Asia-Pacific) ;
4. To develop students’ capacity for critical analysis and logical thinking and to encourage
5. To develop a general range of transferable and generic skills in problem-solving and
reasoning, time-management and written and oral communication.
Your report should be a maximum of 3,000 words, including references but excluding the
You must include a word count with your work.
NB: The bibliography is NOT included within the word count. However, footnotes ARE INCLUDED
within the word count.
There is a 10% leeway permitted if needed, thus you may exceed the word count within said 10%
which amounts to NO MORE than 3,300 total words.
If the words exceed 3,300, then markers will cease considering content for the purpose of grading
and feedback once the stated maximum length has been exceeded and award marks ONLY on the
basis of work within the stated acceptable upper limit of length.
The assessment is marked out of 100. The pass mark is 50% and the scale is:
Percentage Mark Level of Performance
90 – 100 Outstanding
80 – 89 Excellent
70 – 79 Very Good
60 – 69 Good
50 – 59 Fair
40 – 49 Adequate
30 – 39 Unsatisfactory
20 – 29 Poor
10 – 19 Very Poor
0 – 9 Extremely Poor
The answer demonstrates no relevant knowledge and does not identify any relevant legal
issues. There is no analysis, evaluation or synthesis and no evidence of reflection. Little
discernible structure and lack of clarity. No references or no attempt to provide evidence of
sources used. Overall, extremely poor.
The answer demonstrates virtually no relevant knowledge and identifies the key issues very
poorly. The author is unable to identify appropriate issues for reflection and there is no
meaningful analysis. Arguments presented are inappropriate and poorly linked. Very poor
structure and clarity. Lack of ability to source adequate material and very poor referencing.
Overall a very poor effort.
The answer shows inconsistent and inaccurate knowledge of the key material. Poor
identification of key themes. It attempts to evaluate the material but lacks critical approach and
evidence. There is evidence of confusion in the argumentation and the answer lacks clarity. The
structure is disorganised and the referencing contains numerous errors. Overall a poor effort.
The answer shows a limited evidence of knowledge and it does not identify the key themes to a
satisfactory level. The work is mainly descriptive with little evaluation or synthesis, it fails to
demonstrate any insight. Unsatisfactory use of primal and secondary sources and a limited
ability to support arguments with relevant sources. Overall unsatisfactory.
The answer has touched on the relevant legal issues and has covered most the questions asked.
It demonstrates basic knowledge. Nevertheless, it remains an incomplete description rather than
an analysis with related commentary. Use of secondary material has been limited and not many
arguments have been incorporated. The essay contains legal errors. Moreover, an essay at this
mark range will contain certain inaccuracies and misconceived points from literature. Overall an
The answer displays a reasonable understanding of the subject with evidence of some breadth of
knowledge: all the points have been covered and some analytic thinking is evident. Few
inconsistencies are present. The answer may lack the ability to develop a well-structured
argument. The key themes may have been identified correctly; however the author fails to
establish an in-depth appreciation of the key aspects and to raise the appropriate concerns.
Overall a fair attempt that leaves room for development.
The answer shows a good understanding of the key issues, an adequate and correct appreciation
of the topic and a satisfactory amount of primary and secondary resources. The use of specific
examples has also been satisfactory. Moreover, the author is in position to present arguments in
a critical manner. However, the analysis could have been more thorough and the argumentation
presented could have been better structured. Overall, a good effort.
The answer shows comprehensive knowledge of the main concepts. Very accurate and critical
examples have been provided that demonstrate a very good knowledge of the key points. There
is constructive use of secondary data. The author raises the key issues that the assignment asks
and evaluates them in detail. In general, the submission demonstrates a detailed understanding
of the subject and goes beyond becoming a presentation of arguments. As such, the author shows
awareness of the wider context of the assignment as is able to provide conceptual links and
comments. A very good effort.
The answer demonstrates an excellent understanding of the key points. Excellent in critical
analysis and synthesis and the arguments are handled with imaginative interpretation of the
material. The author demonstrates scholarly style in relation to structure, logical progression and
clarity. There is detailed use of relevant primary and secondary sources which are well referenced
and used creatively to develop the work. Overall excellent work.
The answer demonstrates the willingness of the author to challenge oneself and formulates new
original ideas. The author critically integrates various perspectives and demonstrates outstanding
scholarly style in relation to structure, logical progression and clarity. It synthesises reference
material from a wide range of sources. Overall outstanding.