Occasionally internal disputes arise as to the composition of companies which often results in the submission of contradictory notifications regarding appointments and resignation of Company Officers. There appears to be an underlying assumption that the CRO register is determinative as to the identity of a company’s officer. This is not the case, the CRO is a repository of information that has been submitted to it by or on behalf of companies on statutory forms. The CRO has neither the authority nor the capacity to verify the content of those statutory forms. The onus is on a company to submit accurate information to the CRO that reflects the contents of its own internal registers.

It is a criminal offence to knowingly supply false information to the CRO on a Statutory form, or to be reckless as to whether it is or not the information is correct. Such an offense offence is prosecutable by the Corporate Enforcement Authority. If a party has concerns regarding the validity of a registered Statutory submission due recklessness or the knowing supply of incorrect information then this matter should be raised with the Corporate Enforcement Authority and not the CRO.

If a dispute does arise within a company then the CRO will not intercede, mediate, arbitrate or attempt to resolve disputes between Company Officers in any way. It is the responsibility of the Company Officers to resolve these disputes between themselves. The CRO has no role in dispute resolution. Furthermore, it is a matter for the disputing parties to obtain their own independent legal advice as the Registrar cannot provide legal advice to third parties.