The Companies Act of 71 of 2008 makes a number of important changes to the rules relating to capital maintenance. In line with the objectives of the Companies Act of 71 of 2008, section 44 of the Act has removed the prohibition on the provision of financial assistance by a company which was contained under the previous section 38 of the Companies Act 61 of 1973. Despite the repeal of the prohibition, a transaction which involves the provision of financial assistance by a company for the acquisition of or subscription of its own securities still needs to be effected in accordance with the requirements and conditions that are provided under the Act and Memorandum of Incorporation. To explore the new developments, within this study, the provision of financial assistance in terms of section 44 of the Companies Act of 2008 is, therefore, analysed in detail. On the other hand, the UK Companies Act of 2006 repealed the prohibition on the giving of financial assistance by private companies in most circumstances. It, however, retained the prohibition to public companies only because of the requirements of the Second Company Law Directive (77/91/EEC). This study also explores the rules of financial assistance by a company under the UK Companies Acts in detail. Though the source of financial assistance by a company both in South Africa and in English Company laws is rooted in the English decision of the Trevor v Whitworth case, currently these countries have adopted what is deemed appropriate and significant in their own countries. This study, therefore, examines and compares the rules governing the provision of financial assistance by a company in the company laws of these two countries. / Mercantile Law / LL.M. (Commercial law)

Company directors, being human, may be tempted to promote their own interests rather than those of the companies on whose boards they serve. Directors are subject to a number of legal duties. A director has a fiduciary duty to act in good faith and in the best interests of the company. A number of other duties flow from this duty such as the duty to avoid a conflict of interests. The duty of a director not to appropriate a corporate opportunity belonging to the company of which he or she is a director, also flows from the duty to avoid a conflict of interests. The common-law duties of directors which have their origins in English law, have developed over a number of years. Because of the difficulty that directors had in establishing what their duties were, a number of jurisdictions embarked on a process of codifying or partially codifying these duties. South Africa, Australia and England are three countries that have promulgated legislation which has resulted in the codification or partial codification of directors’ duties. The purpose of the codification or partial codification of directors’ duties was firstly to clarify the duties of directors, and secondly to make the duties more accessible to those affected by them – the directors of companies. In South Africa the Companies Act 71 of 2008 has partially codified the duties of directors. Because directors’ duties have only been partially codified there is uncertainty regarding their scope. This dissertation will focus on the possible effect of the 2008 Companies Act on the duty of a director not to take a corporate opportunity falling to the company. In this dissertation I address two issues involving the effect of the 2008 Companies Act on the duty of a director not to appropriate a corporate opportunity belonging to the company. Firstly, I consider whether the partially codified directors’ duties are wide enough to cover issues involving the appropriation of corporate opportunities. Secondly, I consider the appropriate common-law test or tests to be applied in determining whether, in the specific circumstances, an opportunity should be classified as a corporate opportunity. In considering whether the partially codified duties of directors are wide enough to include the corporate-opportunity rule, I compare the approach to corporate opportunities and the corporate-opportunity rule in South Africa, Australia and England. / Mercantile Law / LL.M. (Corporation Law)

The Companies Act 71 of 2008 (“2008 Companies Act”) will have far reaching effects on the manner in which a company is formed and operated under South African company law and in particular entrenches the procedure that must be followed by a company when acquiring its own shares. The radical amendment of the capital maintenance rules by the introduction of the solvency and liquidity tests to the Companies Act 61 of 1973 has been carried forward under the 2008 Companies Act. These tests impose an obligation on a company to ensure that the company is both solvent and liquid at the time of the acquisition of its own shares and for a stated period thereafter. The 2008 Companies Act further brings the duties and liabilities of the directors in line with their current fiduciary duties in terms of common law. / Mercantile Law / LLM

The Companies Act of 71 of 2008 makes a number of important changes to the rules relating to capital maintenance. In line with the objectives of the Companies Act of 71 of 2008, section 44 of the Act has removed the prohibition on the provision of financial assistance by a company which was contained under the previous section 38 of the Companies Act 61 of 1973. Despite the repeal of the prohibition, a transaction which involves the provision of financial assistance by a company for the acquisition of or subscription of its own securities still needs to be effected in accordance with the requirements and conditions that are provided under the Act and Memorandum of Incorporation. To explore the new developments, within this study, the provision of financial assistance in terms of section 44 of the Companies Act of 2008 is, therefore, analysed in detail. On the other hand, the UK Companies Act of 2006 repealed the prohibition on the giving of financial assistance by private companies in most circumstances. It, however, retained the prohibition to public companies only because of the requirements of the Second Company Law Directive (77/91/EEC). This study also explores the rules of financial assistance by a company under the UK Companies Acts in detail. Though the source of financial assistance by a company both in South Africa and in English Company laws is rooted in the English decision of the Trevor v Whitworth case, currently these countries have adopted what is deemed appropriate and significant in their own countries. This study, therefore, examines and compares the rules governing the provision of financial assistance by a company in the company laws of these two countries. / Mercantile Law / LL.M. (Commercial law)

This research looks at the need and enforceability of legal warranties that companies include in contracts and/or public displays/notices to limit the company’s liability exposure to third parties. It also discusses the liability incurred by a company and that of its directors in their personal capacities (if any) should the legal warranty implemented be found to be unenforceable. The liability that may be incurred by the company and/or its director/s is dependent on whether the legal warranty which it implemented is enforceable or not and therefore it is important to establish what would constitute an enforceable legal warranty. In order to determine what is likely to constitute an enforceable legal warranty the study looks back at what has previously been deemed to constitute an unenforceable legal warranty. This is done by analysing the common law principles of contract, being the freedom to contract and the sanctity of contract, and its development in accordance with our constitutional dispensation through case law precedents. The provisions of the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008 that apply to legal warranties are also analysed in order to determine the anticipated outcome of future case law where the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008 may be applicable to a dispute involving legal warranties. Once what constitutes an unenforceable legal warranty is established, the study will discuss the legal position of a third party, and that of the company, where a third party has suffered damages as a result of the company’s acts or omissions and the company is unable to raise a legal warranty as a defence against such liability, as the legal warranty is found to be unenforceable. Thereafter the study will discuss the measures available to the company where the company is found liable to the third party for the aforementioned damages and the company wishes to mitigate its losses in this regard. Such measures shall include director insurance as well as the recovery of such liability against a director, in the director’s personal capacity, where the company either does not have director insurance or is unable to enforce the director insurance due to the actions of a director. In order to determine the director’s accountability to the company in this regard an assessment is made of the duties imposed on a director in terms of the common law and Companies Act 71 of 2008 to establish whether such duties are wide enough to include a duty on the director to ensure legal warranties he/she plays a part in implementing are enforceable. / Mercantile Law / LL. M. (Corporate Law)

As a company is a juristic person it can only act through human agency. A question that arises because of this fact is under what circumstances a company can be held to a contract by a third party where its representative was unauthorised to enter into such contract. There should be a careful weighing and balancing of the interests of the shareholders and the company on the one hand and the contracting third party on the other. It is further important to have legal certainty on the validity and enforceability of contracts concluded by and with companies as the absence of certainty can hamper business dealings with companies which would have an impact on the economy. The common-law principles of agency form the foundation upon which representation within the context of company law takes place. The law of agency has been adapted in the context of company law to satisfy the unique needs that have originated in this regard. One such adaptation is the creation of the Turquand rule by the English courts which rule was taken over by the South African courts. One of the primary reasons for creating the Turquand rule was due to the harsh effect that the common-law doctrine of constructive notice had on third parties dealing with a company. In this study an examination of the current legal position regarding representation of a company in South Africa was undertaken. The history and development of the common-law principles of agency and doctrines that are unique to representation in a company law context are analysed and the relevant sections of the Companies Act 71 of 2008 are discussed. The integration of the common-law principles with the relevant provisions of the Companies Act 71 of 2008 is considered and recommendations are made in respect thereof. In support of the analysis, a comparative study was undertaken of the history and development of this subject matter in England. It was concluded that South African company law, with all its shortcomings and uncertainties is still to be preferred above the position in England. / Aangesien ‘n maatskappy ‘n regspersoon is, kan dit slegs deur middel van natuurlike persone as agente optree. ‘n Vraag wat as gevolg van hierdie feit ontstaan is onder watter omstandighede ‘n maatskappy deur ‘n derde party gebonde gehou kan word aan ‘n kontrak waar die maatskappy se verteenwoordiger nie gemagtig was om die kontrak aan te gaan nie. Daar behoort ‘n versigtige afweging te wees tussen die belange van die maatskappy en sy aandeelhouers aan die een kant en ‘n derde party wat met die maatskappy kontrakteer aan die ander kant. Dit is verder belangrik om regsekerheid te hê oor die geldigheid en afdwingbaarheid van kontrakte wat met maatskappye aangegaan word aangesien die afwesigheid daarvan besigheidsverkeer met maatskappye kan kortwiek wat ‘n impak op die ekonomie tot gevolg sal hê. Die gemeenregtelike beginsels van verteenwoordiging vorm die basis waarop verteenwoordiging binne die konteks van maatskappyereg plaasvind. Verteenwoordigingsreg is aangepas binne die konteks van maatskappye om voorsiening te maak vir die unieke behoeftes wat in hierdie verband ontstaan het. Een sodanige aanpassing is die skepping van die Turquand reël deur die Engelse howe, welke reël deur die Suid-Afrikaanse howe oorgeneem is. Een van die hoofredes vir die skepping van die Turquand reël is die onregverdige uitwerking wat die gemeenregtelike leerstuk van toegerekende kennis op derde partye gehad het wat met ‘n maatskappy onderhandel. ‘n Studie van die huidige regsposisie rakende verteenwoordiging van ‘n maatskappy in Suid-Afrika is hierin gedoen. Die geskiedenis en ontwikkeling van die gemeenregtelike beginsels van verteenwoordiging en leerstukke eie aan verteenwoordiging in die konteks van maatskappyereg is geanaliseer. Die betrokke artikels van die Maatskappywet 71 van 2008 word bespreek. Die integrasie van hierdie gemeenregtelike beginsels met die betrokke bepalings van die Maatskappywet 71 van 2008 is oorweeg en aanbevelings in verband daarmee gemaak. Ter ondersteuning van die analise is ‘n vergelykende studie van die gekiedenis en ontwikkeling van hierdie onderwerp in Engeland onderneem. Daar is tot die slotsom gekom dat die Suid-Afrikaanse maatskappyereg, met al sy tekortkominge en onsekerhede nogsteeds bo die posisie in Engeland te verkies is. / Mercantile Law / LL. M.

Thesis (MBA (Business Management))--University of Stellenbosch, 2009. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The King II Report on Corporate Governance reported that the 19th Century saw the foundations laid for modern corporations, this was the century of the entrepreneur. The 20th Century became the century of management and that the 21st Century promises to be a century of governance, as the focus swings to the legitimacy and the effectiveness of the wielding of power over corporate entities worldwide. South Africa has come a long way since the companies reform project was formally launched in 2004 when the Department of Trade and Industry published the guidelines for corporate law reform in South Africa. Most critics believe that the new Companies Act is long overdue and will contribute to South Africa’s economic growth and align us with international standards and practices. The aim of this research report is to educate directors and potential directors on the most significant changes brought by the new Act and the responsibilities and liabilities of directors as set out in The King II Report. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Volgens die King II Report is die fondasie vir moderne korporasies gedurende die 19de eeu gelê – die eeu van die entrepreneur. Die 20ste eeu het die eeu van bestuur geword, terwyl die 21ste eeu beloof om ‘n eeu van beheer te wees soos wat die fokus verskuif na die geldigheid en die effektiewe beheer van mag oor korporatiewe entiteite wêreldwyd. Suid-Afrika het ‘n lang pad gestap sedert die Maatskappye-hervormingsprojek formeel geloods is in 2004 met publikasie van die Departement van Handel en Nywerheid se riglyne oor korporatiewe regshervorming in Suid-Afrika. Die nuwe Maatskappye wet is lankverwag en meeste kritici glo dat dit sal bydra tot ekonomiese groei in Suid-Afrika en Suid-Afrika in lyn sal plaas met internasionale standaarde en praktyke. Die doel van hierdie navorsingsverslag is om direkteure en potensiele direkteure in te lig omtrent die mees noemenswaardige veranderinge wat deur die nuwe Maatskappye wet daargestel sal word asook die verantwoordelikhede en aanspreeklikheid van direkteure soos uiteengesit in die King II Report.

LL.M. (Commercial Law) / Please refer to full text to view abstract.

Doctor Legum - LLD / The ideals of shareholder and creditor protection are affected by legislation pertaining to the validity of a company’s transactions. Until legislative reforms introduced in the twentieth century, a company’s capacity and the ultra vires doctrine traditionally limited the company’s ability to contract. Therefore, the legal framework regulating corporate capacity influences a company’s interactions with outsiders. The goal of the law in this regard should be to facilitate commerce while providing adequate protection to all affected stakeholders. South Africa’s Companies Act 71 of 2008 (the Act) contains several novel provisions regarding a company’s capacity, the desirability of which is questionable. Special purpose vehicles (SPVs) are used for various purposes in commerce, from asset holding in the financial services sector to concluding complex financial functions in corporate finance. For instance, traditional securitisation is a financial engineering technique that makes use of corporate SPVs. Traditional securitisation is a valuable risk management, earnings management, and corporate financing tool. Incorporators of securitisation SPVs often include capacity restrictions in the constitutions of such entities as a means of reducing the likelihood that the SPV will be subject to liquidation proceedings.This thesis analyses the capacity provisions in the Act to determine whether they provide a commercially desirable framework to facilitate the activities of SPVs used in traditional securitisation schemes. The thesis argues that the capacity provisions in the Act in their current form are undesirable because they place third parties at too great a risk in exchange for inconsistent and unreliable shareholder protection. Executory ultra vires contracts concluded by limited capacity companies are at the same time valid and capable of being restrained by a single shareholder, director or prescribed officer of the company. It is argued that the Act’s approach to corporate capacity is detrimental to commercial certainty and creditor protection, and that capacity restrictions under the current framework do not provide any more shareholder protection than ordinary authority limitations would. Consequently, it is argued that the capacity provisions in the Act do not make a positive contribution to the “insolvency-remoteness” of SPVs used in traditional securitisation schemes. It is recommended that the capacity provisions in the Act should be substantially amended, or deleted.

This paper examines the different share valuation methods and principles likely to be used by a court in determining the fair value of dissenting shareholders’ shares in appraisal proceedings in terms of section 164(14) of the Companies Act 2008. It is submitted that the valuation principles and methods used by the courts will affect the operation of the triggering actions contemplated in subsections 164(2)(a) - (b). It is proposed that section 164 court appraisals are likely to be guided by the valuation methods and principles developed in section 252 and section 440K court appraisals under the Companies Act 1973, as well as by the decisions of the courts in the state of Delaware relating to share valuations under the appraisal remedy. It is further proposed that the purpose ascribed to the appraisal remedy will influence the application of these valuation methods and principles. / Mercantile Law / LL.M. (Corporate law)