公司根据2008年《公司法》第71条第48条和114(1)条重新收购自己发行的股份:通过Capprec进行关键评估

S. Bidie
{"title":"公司根据2008年《公司法》第71条第48条和114(1)条重新收购自己发行的股份:通过Capprec进行关键评估","authors":"S. Bidie","doi":"10.47348/samlj/v34/i1a3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since the Companies Act 2008 came into being, there has been no clear direction regarding the interpretation to be given to the provisions regulating buy-back transactions. Recently, the provisions finally received some concrete attention in the judgment of Windell J in First National Nominees (Pty) Limited v Capital Appreciation Limited (Capprec). The judgment is important because it has since provided a measure of clarity on the potent interdependence between sections 48 and 114 of the 2008 Act, and how these must be interpreted. What is of interest is how Windell J set out and interpreted the operation and interdependence between section 48(2)(a), section 48(8)(b) and section 114 of the 2008 Act. Overall, the arguments from both parties in Capprec presented Windell J with a solid foundation that enabled the court to proffer a succinct and illuminating direction on the interpretation and operation of the provisions. This article attempts to extricate whether the course Windell J adopted in her judgment is consistent with what the 2008 Act contemplates, and if not, what would have been the appropriate course to take. The article demonstrates that Windell J did not seize the opportunity to thoroughly engage with section 114(1)(e) regulating buy-back schemes of arrangement and to ascertain what a scheme entails. This is despite the fact that in Capprec both parties’ arguments were underpinned by whether or not the proposed arrangement was a scheme. In this regard, Windell J’s approach is disappointing and is criticised because her interpretation means that the provisions of the 2008 Act have still not been clarified, although we have been waiting for 13 years for clarification. This is an unnecessary oversight by the judge.","PeriodicalId":118675,"journal":{"name":"South African Mercantile Law Journal","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Re-Acquisition by a Company of Own Issued Shares under Sections 48 and 114(1) of the Companies Act 71 of 2008: A Critical Assessment through Capprec\",\"authors\":\"S. Bidie\",\"doi\":\"10.47348/samlj/v34/i1a3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Since the Companies Act 2008 came into being, there has been no clear direction regarding the interpretation to be given to the provisions regulating buy-back transactions. Recently, the provisions finally received some concrete attention in the judgment of Windell J in First National Nominees (Pty) Limited v Capital Appreciation Limited (Capprec). The judgment is important because it has since provided a measure of clarity on the potent interdependence between sections 48 and 114 of the 2008 Act, and how these must be interpreted. What is of interest is how Windell J set out and interpreted the operation and interdependence between section 48(2)(a), section 48(8)(b) and section 114 of the 2008 Act. Overall, the arguments from both parties in Capprec presented Windell J with a solid foundation that enabled the court to proffer a succinct and illuminating direction on the interpretation and operation of the provisions. This article attempts to extricate whether the course Windell J adopted in her judgment is consistent with what the 2008 Act contemplates, and if not, what would have been the appropriate course to take. The article demonstrates that Windell J did not seize the opportunity to thoroughly engage with section 114(1)(e) regulating buy-back schemes of arrangement and to ascertain what a scheme entails. This is despite the fact that in Capprec both parties’ arguments were underpinned by whether or not the proposed arrangement was a scheme. In this regard, Windell J’s approach is disappointing and is criticised because her interpretation means that the provisions of the 2008 Act have still not been clarified, although we have been waiting for 13 years for clarification. This is an unnecessary oversight by the judge.\",\"PeriodicalId\":118675,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"South African Mercantile Law Journal\",\"volume\":\"46 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"South African Mercantile Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.47348/samlj/v34/i1a3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African Mercantile Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47348/samlj/v34/i1a3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自《2008年公司法》出台以来,对于规范回购交易的条款的解释一直没有明确的方向。最近,在Windell J在First National提名人(Pty) Limited诉Capital Appreciation Limited (Capprec)一案的判决中,这些条款终于得到了一些具体的关注。这一判决很重要,因为它为2008年法案第48条和第114条之间的相互依存关系提供了一个清晰的尺度,以及这些条款必须如何解释。我们感兴趣的是Windell J如何阐述和解释2008年法案第48(2)(a)条、第48(8)(b)条和第114条之间的运作和相互依存关系。总的来说,Capprec案双方的论点为Windell J案提供了坚实的基础,使法院能够就条款的解释和操作提供简洁明了的指导。本文试图揭示Windell J在她的判决中所采取的路线是否与2008年法案的设想相一致,如果不一致,应该采取什么样的路线。本文表明,Windell J没有抓住机会彻底参与第114(1)(e)条规定的回购安排计划,并确定计划需要什么。尽管在Capprec案件中,双方的论点都以拟议的安排是否为一项计划为基础。在这方面,Windell J的方法令人失望,并受到批评,因为她的解释意味着2008年法案的条款仍然没有得到澄清,尽管我们已经等待了13年才得到澄清。这是法官不必要的疏忽。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Re-Acquisition by a Company of Own Issued Shares under Sections 48 and 114(1) of the Companies Act 71 of 2008: A Critical Assessment through Capprec
Since the Companies Act 2008 came into being, there has been no clear direction regarding the interpretation to be given to the provisions regulating buy-back transactions. Recently, the provisions finally received some concrete attention in the judgment of Windell J in First National Nominees (Pty) Limited v Capital Appreciation Limited (Capprec). The judgment is important because it has since provided a measure of clarity on the potent interdependence between sections 48 and 114 of the 2008 Act, and how these must be interpreted. What is of interest is how Windell J set out and interpreted the operation and interdependence between section 48(2)(a), section 48(8)(b) and section 114 of the 2008 Act. Overall, the arguments from both parties in Capprec presented Windell J with a solid foundation that enabled the court to proffer a succinct and illuminating direction on the interpretation and operation of the provisions. This article attempts to extricate whether the course Windell J adopted in her judgment is consistent with what the 2008 Act contemplates, and if not, what would have been the appropriate course to take. The article demonstrates that Windell J did not seize the opportunity to thoroughly engage with section 114(1)(e) regulating buy-back schemes of arrangement and to ascertain what a scheme entails. This is despite the fact that in Capprec both parties’ arguments were underpinned by whether or not the proposed arrangement was a scheme. In this regard, Windell J’s approach is disappointing and is criticised because her interpretation means that the provisions of the 2008 Act have still not been clarified, although we have been waiting for 13 years for clarification. This is an unnecessary oversight by the judge.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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