2018 New Mexico Statutes
Chapter 55 - Uniform Commercial Code
Article 8 - Investment Securities
Section 55-8-204 - Effect of issuer's restriction on transfer.
A restriction on transfer of a security imposed by the issuer, even if otherwise lawful, is ineffective against a person without knowledge of the restriction unless:
(1) the security is certificated and the restriction is noted conspicuously on the security certificate; or
(2) the security is uncertificated and the registered owner has been notified of the restriction.
History: 1978 Comp., § 55-8-204, enacted by Laws 1996, ch. 47, § 24.
OFFICIAL COMMENTS
UCC Official Comments by ALI & the NCCUSL. Reproduced with permission of the PEB for the UCC. All rights reserved.
1. Restrictions on transfer of securities are imposed by issuers in a variety of circumstances and for a variety of purposes, such as to retain control of a close corporation or to ensure compliance with federal securities laws. Other law determines whether such restrictions are permissible. This section deals only with the consequences of failure to note the restriction on a security certificate.
This section imposes no bar to enforcement of a restriction on transfer against a person who has actual knowledge of it.
2. A restriction on transfer of a certificated security is ineffective against a person without knowledge of the restriction unless the restriction is noted conspicuously on the certificate. The word "noted" is used to make clear that the restriction need not be set forth in full text. Refusal by an issuer to register a transfer on the basis of an unnoted restriction would be a violation of the issuer's duty to register under Section 8-401 [55-8-401 NMSA 1978].
3. The policy of this section is the same as in Section 8-202 [55-8-202 NMSA 1978]. A purchaser who takes delivery of a certificated security is entitled to rely on the terms stated on the certificate. That policy obviously does not apply to uncertificated securities. For uncertificated securities, this section requires only that the registered owner has been notified of the restriction. Suppose, for example, that A is the registered owner of an uncertificated security, and that the issuer has notified A of a restriction on transfer. A agrees to sell the security to B, in violation of the restriction. A completes a written instruction directing the issuer to register transfer to B, and B pays A for the security at the time A delivers the instruction to B. A does not inform B of the restriction, and B does not otherwise have notice or knowledge of it at the time B pays and receives the instruction. B presents the instruction to the issuer, but the issuer refuses to register the transfer on the grounds that it would violate the restriction. The issuer has complied with this section, because it did notify the registered owner A of the restriction. The issuer's refusal to register transfer is not wrongful. B has an action against A for breach of transfer warranty, see Section 8-108(b)(4)(iii) [55-8-108 NMSA 1978]. B's mistake was treating an uncertificated security transaction in the fashion appropriate only for a certificated security. The mechanism for transfer of uncertificated securities is registration of transfer on the books of the issuer; handing over an instruction only initiates the process. The purchaser should make arrangements to ensure that the price is not paid until it knows that the issuer has or will register transfer.
4. In the indirect holding system, investors neither take physical delivery of security certificates nor have uncertificated securities registered in their names. So long as the requirements of this section have been satisfied at the level of the relationship between the issuer and the securities intermediary that is a direct holder, this section does not preclude the issuer from enforcing a restriction on transfer. See Section 8-202(a) [55-8-202 NMSA 1978] and Comment 2 thereto.
5. This section deals only with restrictions imposed by the issuer. Restrictions imposed by statute are not affected. See Quiner v. Marblehead Social Co., 10 Mass. 476 (1813); Madison Bank v. Price, 79 Kan. 289, 100 P. 280 (1909); Healey v. Steele Center Creamery Ass'n, 115 Minn. 451, 133 N.W. 69 (1911). Nor does it deal with private agreements between stockholders containing restrictive covenants as to the sale of the security.
"Certificated security" Section 8-102(a)(4) [55-8-102 NMSA 1978]
"Conspicuous" Section 1-201(10) [55-1-201 NMSA 1978]
"Issuer" Section 8-201 [55-8-201 NMSA 1978]
"Knowledge" Section 1-201(25)
"Notify" Section 1-201(25)
"Purchaser" Sections 1-201(33) & 8-116 [55-8-116 NMSA 1978]
"Security" Section 8-102(a)(15)
"Security certificate" Section 8-102(a)(16)
"Uncertificated security" Section 8-102(a)(18)
Repeals and reenactments. — Laws 1996, ch. 47, § 24 repealed former 55-8-204 NMSA 1978, as amended by Laws 1987, ch. 248 § 13, and enacted a new section, effective May 15, 1996.
Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — Provision for post-mortem payment or performance as affecting instrument's character and validity as a contract, 1 A.L.R.2d 1178.
Construction and application of provision restricting sale or transfer of corporate stock, 2 A.L.R.2d 745.
Construction and effect of § 15 of Uniform Stock Act prohibiting restriction on transfer of shares unless such restriction is stated on the certificate, 29 A.L.R.2d 901.
Validity of restrictions on alienation of corporate stock, 61 A.L.R.2d 1318.
Dominant stockholders' accountability to minority for profit, bonus or the like received on sale of stock to outsiders, 38 A.L.R.3d 738.
Validity and construction of provision restricting transfer of corporate stock, which conditions transfer upon consent of one other than shareholder, officer or director of corporation, 53 A.L.R.3d 1272.
