Markdown Editor

Proxy Voting Policy Template (SEC Rule 206(4)-6, SRD II)

Voting authority register, principles, topic guidelines, voting process, proxy adviser oversight, conflicts, share recall, non-voting, escalation, N-PX and SRD II disclosure, records

ISO・コンプライアンスフルSEC Rule 206(4)-6 and 204-2(c)(2); Form N-PX; SRD II Art. 3g; Reg (EU) 231/2013 Art. 37proxyvotingpolicy

使い方: Use it when an adviser or asset manager votes client securities and needs the written policy Rule 206(4)-6 and SRD II expect. Fill the voting authority register and the topic guidelines first, then the process controls and disclosures. The main pitfall is following a proxy adviser's pre-populated votes without the review and oversight the firm remains responsible for.

プレビュー

Proxy Voting Policy: [Firm legal name]

Written proxy voting policy and procedures for an investment adviser or asset manager that has authority to vote client securities. It is built on SEC Rule 206(4)-6 under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (17 CFR 275.206(4)-6), the proxy records in Rule 204-2(c)(2), Form ADV Part 2A Item 17 and, where relevant, Form N-PX reporting (Rule 30b1-4 for registered funds and Rule 14Ad-1 for say-on-pay votes of institutional investment managers, as amended in 2022). For EU asset managers it covers the engagement policy and annual voting disclosure of the Shareholder Rights Directive as amended by Directive (EU) 2017/828 (SRD II, Articles 3g, 3i and 3j) and the voting strategy duties for AIFMs (Delegated Regulation (EU) No 231/2013 Article 37) and UCITS management companies (Directive 2010/43/EU Article 21). UK firms map it to FCA COBS 2.2B and the UK Stewardship Code 2026 (references only). The example firm, Kestrel Bay Capital, and its EU affiliate Kestrel Bay Capital Europe are fictional. Replace every [bracketed] value and every row marked Example. Obtain the law or rule for the normative text. This is a document format, not legal, compliance or investment advice, and the voting positions shown are examples, not recommendations.

Document control

FieldValue
Document ID[PVP-001]
Firm[Kestrel Bay Capital LLC] (Example)
Entities covered[Kestrel Bay Capital LLC (SEC-registered investment adviser); Kestrel Bay Capital Europe (MiFID investment firm providing portfolio management, an "asset manager" under SRD II Art. 2(f))] (Example)
Voting authority[Discretionary separate accounts with voting authority, affiliated funds, sub-advised funds where delegated]
Proxy adviser and voting platform[Provider name, contract reference]
Version[1.0]
Status[Draft / In review / Approved / Superseded]
Owner[@head-of-stewardship]
Approvers/reviewers[@stewardship-committee], [@chief-compliance-officer], [@cio], [@management-body]
Effective dateYYYY-MM-DD
Last updatedYYYY-MM-DD
Next scheduled reviewYYYY-MM-DD (at least annually, before the main voting season)
Classification[Public summary; full policy internal]

Approvals

RoleNameDecisionDate
Stewardship Committee[@chair][Recommend]YYYY-MM-DD
Chief Investment Officer[@name][Approve]YYYY-MM-DD
Chief Compliance Officer[@name][Reviewed for Rule 206(4)-6]YYYY-MM-DD
Management body of Kestrel Bay Capital Europe[@name][Approve engagement policy]YYYY-MM-DD

Revision history

VersionDateAuthorChange
0.1YYYY-MM-DD[@author]First draft
1.0YYYY-MM-DD[@author]Approved
1.1 (Example)YYYY-MM-DD[@author]Annual review: updated board diversity position, added share recall threshold

Contents

1. Scope, authority and regulatory basis

This policy governs how [Kestrel Bay Capital] exercises voting rights and related shareholder rights attached to securities it manages for clients and funds. It covers votes at general meetings, written consents, corporate actions that require an election where they carry a governance decision, and the voting element of the firm's engagement with investee companies.

1.1 Voting authority register

Account or fund typeAuthoritySourcePolicy applies
Discretionary separate accounts (US) (Example)Firm votesInvestment management agreement clause [X]Yes
Discretionary accounts that reserved voting (Example)Client votesAgreement clause [Y]No; ballots go to the client or its custodian
Affiliated US registered funds (Example)Firm votes as adviser under fund board delegationBoard resolution YYYY-MM-DDYes, plus Form N-PX
Kestrel Bay Capital Europe portfolio management mandates (Example)Firm votesPortfolio management agreementYes, plus SRD II disclosure
Sub-advised third-party funds (Example)As delegated by the fund's adviserSub-advisory agreementYes, or the fund's own policy if the agreement says so
ERISA plan accounts (Example)Firm votes unless the plan reserved itAgreement and plan documentsYes, with section 10.2

1.2 Regulatory basis (as of 2026-10; check local law)

RegimeReferenceShort summary
US advisersRule 206(4)-6Written policies reasonably designed to vote in clients' best interest, including how material conflicts are handled; tell clients how to obtain voting records; describe the policy and supply it on request
US advisersRule 204-2(c)(2)Keep the policy, proxy statements, vote records, decision documents and client requests and responses
US advisersForm ADV Part 2A Item 17Describe voting policies, client direction, conflicts and how to get records, or state that the firm does not vote
US advisersCommission Guidance Regarding Proxy Voting Responsibilities of Investment Advisers, Release IA-5325 (August 2019). The 2020 supplement (Release IA-5547) was rescinded in July 2022 (Release 34-95266)Scope of authority agreed with the client, oversight of proxy advisers, when not voting may be appropriate
US registered fundsRule 30b1-4 and Form N-PXAnnual voting record filed by August 31 for the twelve months ended June 30
US institutional investment managers (Section 13(f) filers)Rule 14Ad-1 and Form N-PXAnnual report of say-on-pay votes (Exchange Act Section 14A) over which the manager exercised voting power, by August 31 for the year to June 30; first reports were due 2024-08-31
US engagementSEC staff Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations on Schedule 13G eligibility (Questions 103.11 and 103.12, updated 2025-02)Some engagement conduct may be treated as influencing control, which affects 13G eligibility
US ERISA plansERISA fiduciary duties; 29 CFR 2550.404a-1Voting is a fiduciary act; check the current text of the regulation and any pending Department of Labor rulemaking
EU asset managersDirective 2007/36/EC as amended by Directive (EU) 2017/828, Art. 3gEngagement policy covering voting, and annual public disclosure of its implementation, voting behaviour, most significant votes, use of proxy advisers and how votes were cast, on a comply-or-explain basis
EU asset managersArt. 3iAnnual report to institutional investor clients, including use of proxy advisers and securities lending policy
EU proxy advisersArt. 3jCode of conduct and transparency duties of the proxy adviser itself
EU AIFMsDelegated Regulation (EU) No 231/2013 Art. 37Voting strategy for AIF portfolios: monitor corporate actions, align votes with the AIF's objectives, manage conflicts; a summary of the strategy made available to investors and details of actions taken on request
EU UCITS management companiesDirective 2010/43/EU Art. 21Equivalent voting strategy for UCITS
United KingdomFCA COBS 2.2B; UK Stewardship Code 2026 (in force from 2026-01-01)References only; obtain the Handbook and Code texts

2. Roles and responsibilities

RoleResponsibility
Stewardship CommitteeOwns this policy and the guidelines in section 4; decides contested and conflicted votes; reviews proxy adviser oversight; meets [monthly in voting season, quarterly otherwise]
Head of StewardshipDay-to-day owner; maintains guidelines; prepares significant vote rationales; leads engagement linked to votes
Portfolio managers and analystsReview votes for holdings above the materiality threshold; propose departures from guidelines with written rationale
Voting operationsReconcile holdings and ballots, submit instructions on the platform, track deadlines, share blocking and power of attorney needs
Securities lending deskRecall shares when section 8 requires
Chief Compliance OfficerTests compliance with Rule 206(4)-6, reviews conflicted votes, signs off disclosures
Proxy adviser (external)Supplies research, custom policy recommendations and the voting platform; does not decide votes

3. Voting principles

  1. Best interest of clients. The firm votes to protect and enhance the long-term value of client investments, in line with each client's mandate. The firm does not vote to advance its own business interests.
  2. Informed decisions. Each vote is based on the meeting materials, the firm's own research and, where used, proxy adviser research. A vote on a material item is not cast on a pre-populated recommendation without review.
  3. Consistency with engagement. Votes support the objectives the firm pursues in engagement, and voting against management is one of the escalation tools in section 11.
  4. Case by case where it matters. The guidelines set a default. Departures are allowed with a written rationale approved under section 5.
  5. Transparency. The firm explains its approach publicly where law requires and to clients on request.

Materiality threshold: the firm treats a holding as material for review when it is at least [0.5%] of a portfolio's value or at least [1%] of the issuer's voting share capital across all accounts. (Example thresholds; set your own.)

4. Voting guidelines by topic

Guideline IDTopicDefault position (Example)Case-by-case factors
VG-01Election of directorsSupport unless there is a specific concernAttendance below [75%] without explanation; overboarding beyond [four] listed boards for a non-executive; failure to act on a shareholder vote that passed
VG-02Board independenceSupport boards with a majority of independent directors for large companies, or the local code standard where higherControlled companies; local market practice; credible transition plan
VG-03Board committeesExpect independent audit and remuneration committeesCommittee composition, chair independence
VG-04Board diversity and skillsExpect a disclosed policy and a skills matrixMarket norms, disclosure quality, progress against stated targets
VG-05Separation of chair and CEOPrefer separation or a lead independent directorTemporary combinations with a timetable
VG-06Executive pay (say-on-pay)Support plans linked to long-term performance with clear disclosurePay out of line with performance and peers; one-off awards; discretion without explanation; weak clawback
VG-07Equity plansSupport with reasonable dilutionDilution above [10%] over ten years; option repricing without shareholder approval
VG-08Auditor appointment and feesSupportNon-audit fees greater than audit fees; long tenure without tender where local rules expect rotation; restatements
VG-09Capital issuance and buybacksSupport routine authorities within local limitsIssuance without pre-emption above local norms; buybacks that conflict with balance sheet strength
VG-10Mergers, acquisitions and restructuringsCase by caseValuation, strategic rationale, process, conflicts, governance after the deal
VG-11Anti-takeover measuresOppose unless time-limited and approved by shareholdersSpecific threat and board track record
VG-12Shareholder rightsSupport one share one vote, annual elections, majority voting, proxy access at reasonable thresholdsLocal law and structure
VG-13Climate and environmental proposalsCase by case; support requests for decision-useful disclosure where materialMateriality to value, prescriptiveness, company's existing disclosure, cost
VG-14Social and human capital proposalsCase by caseMateriality, existing policies, legal requirements in the market
VG-15Political and lobbying disclosureCase by caseExisting disclosure, alignment with stated company positions
VG-16Routine items (accounts, dividends, meeting formalities)SupportLate or missing reports; qualified audit opinion
VG-17Bundled resolutionsCase by caseWhether the negative element outweighs the positive
VG-18Fixed income and private holdings consentsCase by case by the credit teamEffect on recovery, covenants and seniority

Regional overlays: where local corporate governance codes or law set different norms, the firm applies the guideline in light of the local standard and records the overlay in Annex [A].

5. Voting process

StepControlOwnerEvidence
P-01 Account set-upVoting authority flag set from the agreement; custodian instructed to send ballots to the platformOperationsAuthority register, custodian letter
P-02 Ballot reconciliationDaily match of ballots to holdings on record date; missing ballots chasedVoting operationsReconciliation report
P-03 ResearchPlatform applies the firm's custom policy built from section 4Head of StewardshipPolicy upload record
P-04 ReviewMaterial holdings, contested meetings, M&A and items flagged by the custom policy reviewed by PM or analyst before the cut-offPMsReview sign-off
P-05 Conflict screenMeetings at issuers on the conflict list routed to section 7ComplianceConflict screen log
P-06 Departure approvalAny vote against the custom policy needs written rationale and Head of Stewardship approvalHead of StewardshipRationale record
P-07 SubmissionInstructions submitted at least [two] business days before the platform cut-offVoting operationsPlatform timestamps
P-08 ConfirmationVote confirmations reconciled; rejected votes investigatedVoting operationsException log

Pre-populated recommendations: the platform may fill in votes from the custom policy. The SEC's 2020 supplemental guidance on pre-populated votes was rescinded in 2022, so the checks below are firm practice that supports the duty of care under Rule 206(4)-6, not a response to a specific SEC requirement. Before each cut-off, the firm checks a sample of pre-populated votes against the policy, and reviews every item where the issuer has filed additional materials after the recommendation was issued, so that new information is considered.

6. Use and oversight of proxy advisers

The firm uses [Proxy adviser name] for research, custom recommendations, vote execution and record keeping. Before appointment and at least annually, the Stewardship Committee assesses:

AreaWhat the firm checksEvidence
Capacity and competenceStaff, coverage of the firm's markets, quality of researchDue diligence report
AccuracyProcess for correcting factual errors; error rate in the yearError log, sample review
ConflictsHow the adviser identifies and discloses its own conflicts, for example consulting services to issuersAdviser conflict disclosures
MethodologyHow custom policies are applied; how issuer responses and additional materials are handledMethodology documents
Code of conduct (EU)Whether the adviser discloses the code it applies and reports on it under SRD II Art. 3jAdviser public disclosure
Operational resilienceBusiness continuity, cyber security, data protectionAssurance reports
Oversight IDDateFindingActionStatus
PAO-001 (Example)YYYY-MM-DDTwo factual errors in research on director independence in [market]; both corrected before cut-offAdded independence fields to the sample checkClosed
PAO-002 (Example)YYYY-MM-DDAdviser disclosed a consulting relationship with an issuer held in portfoliosVotes at that issuer reviewed internally without relying on the recommendationOngoing

7. Conflicts of interest in voting

The firm keeps a voting conflict list, updated monthly, of issuers where a material conflict may exist. Sources include:

  • issuers that are clients of the firm, or whose pension plans or affiliates are clients;
  • issuers that distribute the firm's funds or are significant service providers to the firm;
  • issuers where a firm employee or director is a director or senior officer, or has a close family relationship with one;
  • votes on the firm's own affiliated funds or on its parent company; and
  • proxy contests where a party is a significant client or business partner.

Methods to resolve a conflict, in order of preference:

  1. Vote in line with the pre-set guideline in section 4, without discretion. The vote record notes that the guideline was applied.
  2. Where the guideline calls for case-by-case judgement, follow the recommendation of the proxy adviser's custom policy, provided the adviser itself has no conflict at that issuer.
  3. Refer the vote to the Stewardship Committee, with conflicted members excluded, and record the rationale and the conflict.
  4. For votes on the firm's own affiliated funds, echo vote (in the same proportion as other holders) or pass the vote to clients, where permitted by law and the fund documents.

Conflicted votes are recorded as COI-006 in the Conflicts of Interest Register (compliance/conflicts-of-interest-register). Compliance reviews every conflicted vote each quarter.

8. Securities lending and share recall

Shares on loan cannot be voted by the firm. The firm recalls lent shares when:

  • the meeting includes a contested election, merger, acquisition or other item of material value impact;
  • the firm is pursuing an engagement objective that the vote will advance; or
  • the holding is above the materiality threshold in section 3 and the expected benefit of voting exceeds the lending revenue foregone.

Recall decisions are made before the record date. Where the record date is not known in time or the recall fails, the reason is logged.

Recall IDIssuerMeetingItemDecisionResult
REC-001 (Example)[Issuer A]YYYY-MM-DDContested director electionRecall all lent sharesRecalled, voted
REC-002 (Example)[Issuer B]YYYY-MM-DDRoutine annual meetingNo recall: holding below thresholdNot voted on lent portion

9. When the firm may not vote

The firm may decide not to vote, and logs the reason, when:

Reason codeSituationRule
NV-01Share blocking markets, where voting restricts trading until the meetingVote only if the holding is material and the PM accepts the trading restriction
NV-02Power of attorney or re-registration requirements not yet in placeOperations arranges documents; if not possible in time, log
NV-03Late or missing ballot materialsChase the custodian; log
NV-04Cost of voting clearly exceeds the expected benefit, under the terms agreed with the clientApply only where the agreement allows; log the assessment
NV-05Securities lent and not recalled under section 8Log the recall decision
NV-06Position sold after record date where the client agreed the firm need not voteApply only as agreed

10. Client direction and special mandates

10.1 Client direction

Clients with separate accounts may instruct the firm how to vote a particular solicitation, or may adopt their own voting policy, by written notice to [@client-service] at least [ten] business days before the meeting cut-off. The firm votes those instructions and records them as client-directed. Clients in pooled vehicles cannot direct votes unless the fund offers a voting choice programme.

10.2 ERISA plans

Where the firm votes for an ERISA plan, it does so as a fiduciary, solely in the interest of participants and beneficiaries, and keeps records of the votes and the reasons for material decisions. Check the current text of 29 CFR 2550.404a-1 and any Department of Labor rulemaking in progress before each annual review.

10.3 Funds the firm manages

For affiliated registered funds, the fund board approves this policy for the fund, and the firm provides the voting record needed for Form N-PX. For EU AIFs and UCITS, a summary of the voting strategy is made available to investors (for example on the website), and details of the actions taken on the basis of the strategy are provided free of charge on request.

11. Engagement and escalation

Votes against management are part of the firm's escalation route. Where engagement on an objective has not produced progress within the agreed time, the firm may:

  1. vote against the relevant director or committee chair;
  2. vote against the accounts, remuneration report or discharge;
  3. support a relevant shareholder proposal;
  4. pre-declare its voting intention publicly; or
  5. co-file a shareholder proposal, where permitted and consistent with the firm's regulatory position.

For US issuers, Compliance reviews engagement plans that involve statements about voting against directors, so that the firm's eligibility to report on Schedule 13G is not put at risk. Engagement records and outcomes are reported in the Stewardship Report (finance/stewardship-report).

Escalation IDIssuerEngagement objectiveVote usedDateOutcome
ESC-001 (Example)[Company E]Independent audit committee chairAgainst the nomination committee chairYYYY-MM-DDCompany appointed an independent chair the following year

12. Disclosure and reporting

DisclosureAudienceContentFrequency and timing
Form ADV Part 2A Item 17US clientsSummary of this policy, client direction, conflicts, how to get records, copy on requestAnnual update and delivery
Voting record on requestAny clientHow the firm voted that client's securitiesWithin [ten] business days of the request
Policy copy on requestAny clientFull policyWithin [ten] business days
Form N-PX, fundsSEC, publicFund voting record for the year to June 30By August 31 each year
Form N-PX, Rule 14Ad-1SEC, publicSay-on-pay votes for the year to June 30By August 31 each year
SRD II engagement policyPublic, websiteHow voting is integrated in the investment strategyKept current
SRD II annual implementation disclosurePublic, websiteGeneral description of voting behaviour, most significant votes, use of proxy advisers, how votes were cast (insignificant votes may be excluded)Annually
SRD II Art. 3i reportInstitutional investor clientsUse of proxy advisers, securities lending policy and its effect on engagement, among other itemsAnnually
UK Stewardship Code reportingFRC, publicPrinciple 4 exercise of rights and responsibilitiesAnnually, if a signatory

Most significant votes: the firm defines a significant vote as [a vote against management on a material holding, any vote linked to an active engagement objective, any contested meeting, and any vote that drew public attention]. For each, it publishes the issuer, item, vote, rationale and outcome.

13. Records

RecordRule 204-2 referenceKept byRetention
This policy and all prior versions(c)(2)(i)ComplianceAt least five years from the end of the fiscal year of the last entry, the first two years in an appropriate office (Rule 204-2(e)(1))
Proxy statements received(c)(2)(ii)Proxy adviser under written undertaking, or EDGARSame
Record of each vote cast(c)(2)(iii)Proxy adviser under written undertaking, with firm copySame
Documents material to a vote decision or recording its basis(c)(2)(iv)Head of StewardshipSame
Written client requests and the firm's responses(c)(2)(v)Client serviceSame
EU voting strategy, actions taken and disclosuresReg. 231/2013 Art. 37; Directive 2010/43/EU Art. 21; SRD II Art. 3gKestrel Bay Capital EuropeAs national law requires

14. Monitoring, testing and review

14.1 Key indicators

IndicatorDefinitionQuarter result (Example)
Ballot coverageMeetings voted / votable meetings606 / 612 = 99.0%
Unvoted meetings by reasonCount by NV codeNV-01: 3, NV-02: 2, NV-03: 1 (total 6)
Departures from custom policyItems voted against the custom recommendation41, all with approved rationale
Conflicted meetingsMeetings on the conflict list9, all reviewed by Compliance
Proxy adviser errorsFactual errors found2 (PAO-001)
Late submissionsInstructions after the internal deadline in P-074
Client record requestsRequests received and answered in time3 of 3

14.2 Annual review

Each year, before the main voting season, the Stewardship Committee and Compliance review the guidelines against developments in law, market practice and the firm's engagement priorities; the proxy adviser oversight results; testing findings; and client feedback. The CCO includes the testing results in the Annual Compliance Review (compliance/annual-compliance-review).

14.3 Testing approach and common errors

Testing should follow the life of a ballot. Select a sample of meetings across markets and account types, then confirm for each one that the ballot reached the platform, that it was reconciled to holdings on the record date, that the vote followed the custom policy or an approved departure, that conflicted items went through section 7, and that the vote appears in the client record and in the public disclosure. Add a sample of unvoted meetings and check that each has a valid NV reason.

Common errors found in testing: accounts set up without the voting authority flag, so ballots never arrive; votes left to default on the platform after the issuer published additional materials; departures approved after the cut-off; and Form N-PX or SRD II disclosures that do not match the platform record. Each error becomes a finding with an owner and a due date in the Annual Compliance Review.

15. Traceability matrix

RequirementReferenceSectionEvidence
Written policy to vote in clients' best interestRule 206(4)-6(a)3, 4, 5Approved policy, custom policy upload
Address material conflictsRule 206(4)-6(a)7Conflict list, conflicted vote file
Tell clients how to get voting recordsRule 206(4)-6(b)12Form ADV Item 17
Describe policy and furnish copy on requestRule 206(4)-6(c)12Form ADV, request log
Proxy recordsRule 204-2(c)(2)13Record inventory, third-party undertaking
Fund and say-on-pay reportingRule 30b1-4; Rule 14Ad-112Form N-PX filings
Engagement policy and annual disclosureSRD II Art. 3g3, 11, 12Website disclosures
Report to institutional investorsSRD II Art. 3i8, 12Client reports
AIFM and UCITS voting strategyReg. 231/2013 Art. 37; Directive 2010/43/EU Art. 211, 10.3Strategy summary, investor requests
Conflict rules apply to engagementSRD II Art. 3g(3)7Conflicts register COI-006

16. Glossary and references

16.1 Glossary

TermMeaning in this policy
ProxyAuthority to vote shares on behalf of the owner, or the ballot used to do so
Proxy adviserA firm that analyses company disclosures and gives voting research or recommendations to investors
Custom policyVoting rules written by the firm and applied by the proxy adviser's platform
Pre-populated voteA vote filled in automatically on a platform from a policy, before the firm submits it
Say-on-payA shareholder vote on executive compensation
Share blockingA market practice where shares cannot be traded between voting and the meeting
Echo votingVoting shares in the same proportion as all other votes cast
Record dateThe date that decides who is entitled to vote at a meeting
Significant voteA vote the firm reports with its rationale, defined in section 12
EscalationSteps taken when engagement does not achieve its objective

16.2 References

ReferenceVersion or dateUse
17 CFR 275.206(4)-668 FR 6593, 2003-02-07; eCFR checked 2026-10-25Core US rule
17 CFR 275.204-2(c)(2), (e)(1)eCFR checked 2026-10-25Proxy records, retention
17 CFR 270.30b1-4 and 240.14Ad-1; Form N-PXAmended by SEC Release 33-11131, adopted 2022-11-02; first reports due 2024-08-31Annual voting reports
Form ADV Part 2 instructionsSEC 1707 (08-22)Item 17
Commission Guidance Regarding Proxy Voting Responsibilities of Investment AdvisersRelease IA-5325, August 2019; 2020 supplement (IA-5547) rescinded 2022 by Release 34-95266Oversight of proxy advisers
SEC Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations, Exchange Act Sections 13(d) and 13(g)Questions 103.11 and 103.12, updated February 2025Engagement and 13G eligibility
Directive 2007/36/EC as amended by Directive (EU) 2017/828OJ L 132, 20.5.2017; transposition by 10 June 2019Art. 2(f), 3g, 3i, 3j
Delegated Regulation (EU) No 231/2013As amendedArt. 37
Directive 2010/43/EUAs amendedArt. 21
FCA COBS 2.2B; UK Stewardship Code 2026References onlyUK equivalents
29 CFR 2550.404a-1Check current textERISA plans

Standard and licence note

Based on SEC Rules 206(4)-6 and 204-2 under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, Rule 30b1-4 under the Investment Company Act of 1940, Rule 14Ad-1 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Form ADV and Form N-PX as published by the SEC and in the electronic Code of Federal Regulations (US federal works, public domain), and on Directive 2007/36/EC as amended by Directive (EU) 2017/828, Delegated Regulation (EU) No 231/2013 and Directive 2010/43/EU as published on EUR-Lex (reuse with acknowledgement). The FCA Handbook, the UK Stewardship Code and proxy adviser benchmark policies are cited by name only. Rule and article numbers are cited and requirements are described in original wording; no legal text is reproduced. Kestrel Bay Capital, Kestrel Bay Capital Europe and all example data are fictional, and the voting positions are illustrations, not recommendations. Check the current official texts and any later rulemaking before use. This is a document format, not legal, compliance or investment advice. Template licence: MIT.

関連テンプレート