Examining the interpretation of section 115(2)(a) of the Companies Act of 2008

S. Bidie
{"title":"Examining the interpretation of section 115(2)(a) of the Companies Act of 2008","authors":"S. Bidie","doi":"10.17159/2077-4907/2021/ldd.v26.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"For the purposes of protecting the rights and interests of sharehoIders, section 115(2)(a) of the Companies Act 71 of 2008 is imperative and essential. The section and its concomitant provisions are beginning to find their footing before South African courts. One of the occasions when the imperative nature of the section is seen is when directors take part in decision-making where companies intend to enter into share buy-back schemes of arrangement. In that respect, the clarity and precision of the section has so far received Iimited scrutiny. To compound matters, even before the roIe shareholders are expected to play has been thoroughIy scrutinised, the sections relating to shareholders' exercise of power are currently the subject of a proposed repeaI. FortunateIy, recent judgments have begun to provide insight into the interpretation of section 115(2)(a), and the same can be said with respect to simiIar sections from other jurisdictions. This contribution examines these Iatter sections. It chiefIy shows that the judgments consuIted regard shareholder protection, not as a straight-jacket; the protection has its pitfalls. Meritoriously, it shows how courts interpret section 115(2)(a) to protect shareholders from the pitfalls by promoting/advancing shareholder protection. The judgments also speak with one voice in their interpretation of provisions aimed at maintaining the necessary balance between the rights and interests of company stakeholders. Essentially, the judgments admirably show that the process of finding that balance is a delicate exercise.","PeriodicalId":341103,"journal":{"name":"Law, Democracy and Development","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law, Democracy and Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17159/2077-4907/2021/ldd.v26.5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

For the purposes of protecting the rights and interests of sharehoIders, section 115(2)(a) of the Companies Act 71 of 2008 is imperative and essential. The section and its concomitant provisions are beginning to find their footing before South African courts. One of the occasions when the imperative nature of the section is seen is when directors take part in decision-making where companies intend to enter into share buy-back schemes of arrangement. In that respect, the clarity and precision of the section has so far received Iimited scrutiny. To compound matters, even before the roIe shareholders are expected to play has been thoroughIy scrutinised, the sections relating to shareholders' exercise of power are currently the subject of a proposed repeaI. FortunateIy, recent judgments have begun to provide insight into the interpretation of section 115(2)(a), and the same can be said with respect to simiIar sections from other jurisdictions. This contribution examines these Iatter sections. It chiefIy shows that the judgments consuIted regard shareholder protection, not as a straight-jacket; the protection has its pitfalls. Meritoriously, it shows how courts interpret section 115(2)(a) to protect shareholders from the pitfalls by promoting/advancing shareholder protection. The judgments also speak with one voice in their interpretation of provisions aimed at maintaining the necessary balance between the rights and interests of company stakeholders. Essentially, the judgments admirably show that the process of finding that balance is a delicate exercise.
审查《2008年公司法》第115(2)(a)条的解释
为了保护股东的权益,《2008年第71号公司法》第115(2)(a)条是必不可少的。这一节及其附带条款已开始在南非法院站稳脚跟。当董事参与公司打算进入股票回购计划或安排的决策时,就可以看到该条款的必要性。在这方面,本节的明确性和精确性迄今受到的审查有限。更复杂的是,即使在股东预期发挥的作用尚未得到彻底审查之前,与股东行使权力有关的条款目前已被提议重新修订。幸运的是,最近的判决已经开始提供对第115(2)(a)条的解释的见解,对于其他司法管辖区的类似条款也可以这样说。本文研究了后面的这些部分。这主要表明,合议判决是对股东的保护,而不是对股东的保护;这种保护有其缺陷。值得注意的是,它显示了法院如何解释第115(2)(a)条,以通过促进/推进股东保护来保护股东免受陷阱。这些判决书在解释旨在维护公司利益相关者权利和利益之间必要平衡的条款时,也发出了统一的声音。从本质上讲,这些判决令人钦佩地表明,寻找这种平衡的过程是一项微妙的工作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信