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

Carnegie Fonder AB

PRI reporting framework 2020

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


LEA 12. Typical approach to (proxy) voting decisions

12.1. (委任状による)議決権行使を通常どのように決定しているかを明示して下さい。



12.2. 合意された議決権ポリシーがどのように遵守されているかを概観し、ポリシーの例外が適用された場合(該当する場合)のアプローチの詳細を示してください。

The portfolio manager that make the voting decisions is responsible for ensuring that they adhere to our voting policy.

As with our corporate financial analysis, we perform individual analysis of the issues that may arise in connection with the meetings. Many countries have laws and corporate codes governing nomination committees and other committees. In general, we follow the local custom. Where laws and company codes go beyond what we in Sweden are accustomed to, we follow local rules as far as possible, and in markets that are perceived to lack legislation or whose laws and codes fall short of what we are used to, we usually relate our position to international best practice and Swedish corporate codes.

There are six main groups of questions that are common at meetings.

  • Board of directors
  • Auditors
  • Capital structure
  • Remuneration
  • Environmental and social issues
  • Other issues

Our specific expectations and policy on each of these areas can be found here:

12.3. 補足情報[任意]

Voting at general meetings is an expected part of our active fund management, which aims to protect the value of our investments over time and create a good return in the portfolios we manage. The right of shareholders to decide on the affairs of a company is exercised at general meetings.

As with our corporate financial analysis, we perform individual analysis of the issues that may arise in connection with the meetings. As far as possible, Carnegie Fonder’s fund managers participate in general meetings and vote on behalf of the shares in the portfolios. When it is not possible for us to attend, we seek to vote through proxy for the shares we manage.

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

LEA 14. Securities lending programme

14.1. 貴社では、セキュリティーズレンディングを設定していますか?

14.2. 貴社がセキュリティーズレンディングをしていない理由を説明してください。(最大500語)

Carnegie Fonder has taken a decision that none of the funds should engage in securities lending. We believe it is not in the interest of our clients to do so. 

14.4. 補足情報 [任意]

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

15.1. 報告年度内に関与した議決権行使のうち、貴社、または貴社の代理を務めるサービスプロバイダーが議決権行使に先立って企業に懸念を表明したものの割合を示してください。

15.2. これらの企業に対し、議決権行使に先立って懸念を表明した理由を示してください。

15.3. 補足情報 [任意]

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

16.1. 貴社または貴社の代理を務めるサービスプロバイダーが、議決権行使を棄権する場合、または経営陣の提案に反対票を投じる場合に、当該企業にその根拠を伝えた議決権の割合を示してください。これは行使可能な全議決権の中で占める割合とします。

16.2. 貴社が議決権行使を棄権する場合、または経営陣の提案に反対票を投じる場合に、企業にその根拠を伝える理由を示してください。

16.3. 貴社が議決権行使を棄権するまたは経営陣の提案に反対票を投じる根拠を伝える場合、この根拠を公表しているか示してください。

16.4. 補足情報[任意]

LEA 17. Percentage of (proxy) votes cast

17.1. 貴社やサービスプロバイダーが(代理)投票の指示を発行するマンデートを有している上場株式について、報告年度中に行った投票の割合を記載してください。


20 %


17.2. 一定の株式保有分について議決権を行使しない理由を説明して下さい:

17.3. 補足情報[任意]

Some shares were blocked for voting by our proxy agent due to sanctions in Russia. We thought this was very unfortunate and counterproductive as this prevented us from voting to remove directors that were part of these sanction and worked to be allowed to vote on these events. In the event that Carnegie Fonder’s shareholding is negligible in relation to other shareholders, or the shareholding constitutes only a very small part of the funds’ total portfolios, Carnegie Fonder’s participation and exercise of voting rights may be of little importance to the unitholders. Carnegie Fonder may then deviate from the principle of always voting.

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

18.1. 貴社または貴社の代理を務めるサービスプロバイダーが出した議決権行使に係る指示を追跡しているか示してください。

18.2. 貴社または貴社の代理を務める第三者が出した議決権行使に係る指示のうち、各投票項目の占める割合を示してください。

93.6 %
1.33 %
5.11 %

18.3. 貴社が経営陣の提案に対する反対票を投じたケースにおいて、貴社がエンゲージメントを行った企業の占める割合を示してください。


18.4. 補足情報 [任意]

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

19.1. 不首尾に終わった議決権行使後の正式なエスカレーション戦略が貴社にあるか示してください。

19.2. 棄権後、または経営陣に反対する票を投じた後に貴社が用いるエスカレーション戦略を示してください。

19.3. 補足情報 [任意]

LEA 20. Shareholder resolutions

20.1. 貴社が報告年度中に、直接もしくはサービスプロバイダーを介して、ESG株主決議を提出または共同提出したか示してください。

20.7. 補足情報[任意] 

LEA 21. Examples of (proxy) voting activities

21.1. 報告年度に貴社またはサービスプロバイダーが実行した(委任状による)議決権行使の例を提供してください。

Shareholder rights|Other governance

Nominate independent director to the board of Gazprom PJSC.


In collaboration with Russian association API we sent a letter to the board of directors of Gazprom to nominate an independent director. This will be voted on in the AGM of 2020.

Other governance

Interview candidate for board of directors in Lukoil PJSC. Objective to understand why he wanted to accept this nomination, what knowledge he believed he would bring to the board and a brief statement from our end on issues we would like him to stand up for, including ESG issues and governance questions in particular. 




An interview was conducted. Our conclusion was that it seemed like a good candidate. To be seen if he will be nominated and added to the board.


21.2. 補足情報[任意]