This report shows public data only. Is this your organisation? If so, login here to view your full report.

Cadence Investment Partners LLP

PRI reporting framework 2020

You are in Direct - Listed Equity Active Ownership » (Proxy) voting and shareholder resolutions

(Proxy) voting and shareholder resolutions

LEA 12. Typical approach to (proxy) voting decisions

12.1. Indicate how you typically make your (proxy) voting decisions.


Based on

12.2. Provide an overview of how you ensure that your agreed-upon voting policy is adhered to, giving details of your approach when exceptions to the policy are made.

Our investment approach looks for businesses which will enhance shareholder returns over the longer term. We view this as the guiding principal for any business we invest in. This is also, therefore, the cornerstone of our proxy voting policy. We have regular direct contact with managers of invested companies and this is the normal platform for us to ask the company to explain any actions which appear not to comply with our fundamental principle of enhancing long term shareholder returns. Where such an explanation is not justifiable in our view on the basis of management's fiduciary duty to shareholders or in terms of broader good governance standards, we will use the proxy voting system to vote against any such proposals.

All voting decisions are flagged to the wider team via the email instruction, complete with a summary of the rationale. Where there is some doubt around the seriousness of a particular issue and whether it merits a negative response, we discuss this as a group. There are no exceptions to this approach, and given our very focused portfolio of holdings and low turnover we are able to give each voting decision due consideration (eg checking the background of directorship candidates etc).

12.3. Additional information.[Optional]

The analyst responsible for the internal report on each company is responsible for the voting decision in alignment with the senior partner who is the investment manager. A record of each decision is kept internally as well as by our administration partner Compass Asset Management of Lugano

LEA 13. Percentage of voting recommendations reviewed (Not Applicable)

LEA 14. Securities lending programme (Private)

LEA 15. Informing companies of the rationale of abstaining/voting against management

15.1. Indicate the proportion of votes participated in within the reporting year in which where you or the service providers acting on your behalf raised concerns with companies ahead of voting.

15.3. Additional information. [Optional]

We did not have any instances where there were issues connected with an upcoming vote for our invested companies which required prior contact this year. In the event that we become aware of such an issue we will certainly consider prior contact. 

LEA 16. Informing companies of the rationale of abstaining/voting against management

16.1. Indicate the proportion of votes where you, and/or the service provider(s) acting on your behalf, communicated the rationale to companies for abstaining or voting against management recommendations. Indicate this as a percentage out of all eligible votes.

16.2. Indicate the reasons why your organisation would communicate to companies, the rationale for abstaining or voting against management recommendations.

16.3. In cases where your organisation does communicate the rationale for abstaining or voting against management recommendations, indicate whether this rationale is made public.

16.4. Additional information. [Optional]

We regularly abstain on votes where we feel the level of disclosure is insufficient, and communicate this with the proxy provider and with management when we have contact with them. Where we have more serious concerns leading to votes against items, we will communicate our reasons for this to management either directly or at our next company meeting,

LEA 17. Percentage of (proxy) votes cast

17.1. For listed equities in which you or your service provider have the mandate to issue (proxy) voting instructions, indicate the percentage of votes cast during the reporting year.

Votes cast (to the nearest 1%)

100 %

Specify the basis on which this percentage is calculated

17.3. Additional information. [Optional]

LEA 18. Proportion of ballot items that were for/against/abstentions

18.1. Indicate whether you track the voting instructions that you or your service provider on your behalf have issued.

18.2. Of the voting instructions that you and/or third parties on your behalf have issued, indicate the proportion of ballot items that were:

Voting instructions
Breakdown as percentage of votes cast
For (supporting) management recommendations
91 %
Against (opposing) management recommendations
9 %
0 %

18.3. In cases where your organisation voted against management recommendations, indicate the percentage of companies which you have engaged.


18.4. Additional information. [Optional]

As we typically engage with companies over voting issues during our next contact, some are still outstanding. I estimate that we have engaged with just over half so far.

LEA 19. Proportion of ballot items that were for/against/abstentions

19.1. Indicate whether your organisation has a formal escalation strategy following unsuccessful voting.

19.3. Additional information. [Optional]

We do not have a formal strategy but we would track the process of any votes we believe may represent a serious dereliction of corporate governance or broader good corporate reponsibility.

LEA 20. Shareholder resolutions (Private)

LEA 21. Examples of (proxy) voting activities (Private)