Published with kind permission from the Department of Trade and Industries (DTI)
In November 2010 the new companies act came into effect. Small and medium enterprises would do well to take note of this new act.
The main features of the Companies Act, 2008, which came into effect in November 2010, are as follows:
Company legislation plan
All existing close corporations will retain their current status until such time as their members decide that it is in their interest to convert to a company. Therefore, the Act provides for the indefinite continued existence of the Close Corporations Act. However, it also provides for the closing of that Act as an avenue for the incorporation of new entities or for the conversion of any existing companies into close corporations as of the effective date of the Companies Act.
The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development has informed the DTI of proposals to develop uniform insolvency legislation. If brought to use, this legislation would overlap and may conflict with the regime set out in the current Companies Act, 1973 for dealing with and winding up insolvent companies. The Act therefore provides for transitional arrangements that will retain part of the current regime for the interim until any new uniform insolvency law is introduced.
Institutional reforms
The Companies Act proposes the establishment of a new institution, the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission. It furthermore proposes the transformation of three existing company law entities, namely the Take-over Regulation Panel, the Financial Reporting Standards Council and the Companies Tribunal. Together, these four institutions, as discussed in more detail below, will provide for a more predictable regulatory and enforcement system.
The Companies and Intellectual Property Commission
Chapter 8 of the Act provides for the migration of the Companies and Intellectual Property Registration Office (CIPRO) into a newly established organ of state with significantly expanded functions and powers, to be known as the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission (“the Commission”). The Commission will be a merging of CIPRO and the enforcement division of the DTI, known as the Office of Company and Intellectual Property Enforcement (OCIPE).
In particular, most of the administrative functions currently assigned to the Minister under the Companies Act, 1973, apart from the appointment of members of the institutions and the making of regulations, are de-politicised and placed within the jurisdiction of the Commission.
However, the Minister retains the authority to issue policy directives to the Commission. The main functions of the Commission are as follows:
The Take-over Regulation Panel
The Act proposes the transformation of the existing Securities Regulation Panel (SRP) into an independent organ of state, the Take-over Regulation Panel (‘‘the Panel‘‘). The Panel will have powers similar to those currently vested in the SRP. However, under the Act its authority to prescribe rules will be exercised in consultation with the Minister, who alone will have final authority to make regulations.
The Financial Reporting Standards Council
The Financial Reporting Standards Council (FRSC) is to be re-established as an advisory committee to the Minister. It will be tasked with advising the Minister on regulations establishing financial reporting standards which will govern the form, content and maintenance of companies’ financial records and statements.
The Companies Tribunal
The Act provides for one new body, the Companies Tribunal (‘‘the Tribunal’’), which will be an independent organ of state. The Tribunal will have a dual mandate, first, to serve as a forum for voluntary alternative dispute resolution in any matter arising under the Act and second, to carry out reviews of administrative decisions made by the Commission.
Decisions of the Tribunal will be binding on the Commission, but not on any third party, which has a constitutional right of access to a court for further review. As is the case under the Companies Act, 1973, the High Court remains the primary medium for the resolution of disputes and the interpretation and enforcement of the proposed Companies Act.
Categories of companies
The Companies Act, 2008 provides for two categories of companies, namely non-profit and profit companies.
Non-Profit Companies
Non-profit companies take the place of companies limited by guarantee and section 21 companies. Non-profit companies are characterised by the following:
Profit Companies
Profit companies are categorised as companies without restrictions on the transferability of their shares and that do not prohibit offers to the public, i.e. larger public companies, and companies that do contain restrictions on the transferability of their shares and that prohibit offers to the public, i.e. smaller private companies. They may take one of four different forms: a personal liability company, a state-owned company, a public company and a private company.
Personal Liability Companies
A personal liability company is comparable to companies contemplated in section 53(b) of the Companies Act, 1973. Its name must end with the word “Incorporated” or its abbreviation “Inc.”.
State-Owned Companies
State-owned companies were often incorporated or registered under the Companies Act, 1973, but were not recognised in that Act as requiring separate legislative treatment in respect of certain matters to avoid conflict or overlap with other legislation specifically applicable to them, and not to companies. The name of a state-owned company must end with the expression “SOE Ltd.”.
Public Companies
Public companies are comparable to companies of the same status under the Companies Act, 1973. They are characterised by the following:
Private Companies
Private companies are comparable to companies of the same status under the Companies Act, 1973. They are characterised by the following:
• They are subject to fewer disclosure and transparency requirements.
• A private company will still be prohibited from offering its shares to the public and the transferability of its shares will be restricted, but it may now have more than 50 shareholders.
• The name of a private company must end with the expression “Proprietary Limited” or its abbreviation “(Pty) Ltd.”
• The board of a private company must comprise at least one director, or any other minimum number as stipulated in its MoI. Each incorporator is a first director of the company.
• In a further effort to create a more flexible regime, the Bill makes exceptions for companies of which –
The future of close corporations
Under the Act, smaller businesses will no longer automatically be subject to strict financial reporting and auditing requirements. This allows companies with characteristics very similar to those of close corporations to be formed. In effect, it means there will be no further need for close corporations. Once the Companies Act, 2008 comes into operation, it will not be possible to register any new close corporations, nor may companies be converted into close corporations. Existing close corporations will be treated as follows:
Company formation
The Act gives effect to the essential core principle that the formation of a company is an action by persons in the exercise of their constitutional right to freedom of association combined with their common law right to freedom of contract.
As such, the Act reflects, in both its language and its substance, the principle that the incorporation of a company is a right, rather than a privilege bestowed by the State. The Act accordingly places minimal requirements on the act of incorporation.
A company is incorporated by the adoption of a MoI, which is the sole governing document of the company. The Act imposes certain specific requirements on the content of an MoI which are necessary to protect the interests of shareholders in the company. It further provides a number of default rules which companies may accept or alter as they wish to meet their needs and serve their interests.
In addition, the Act allows for companies to add to the required or default provisions to address matters not addressed in the Act itself, but every provision of every MoI must be consistent with the Act, except to the extent that it expressly contemplates otherwise. In other words, a company cannot fundamentally ‘contract out’ of the Companies Act, 2008. For companies wishing to, the Act provides for the simplest possible form of incorporation by use of a standard form of MoI which permits the incorporators to accept the required provisions, as well as the default provisions with or without alteration.
Company names
The Companies Act, 2008 retains the broad outlines of the existing regime for company names. In particular, it continues the practice of name reservation, but this will no longer be mandatory. The name reservation process will no longer be a separate, formal pre-registration process. If a proposed name is rejected, then the registration number becomes the name of the company.
Transitional provisions allow for names registered or reserved under the current regime to continue to be so registered or reserved under the Act. With regard to the criteria for acceptable names, the Act proposes that maximum effect be given to the constitutional right of freedom of expression. To this effect, the Act restricts a company name only as far as necessary to:
Further to the above, the Act, 2008 also contains provisions to prevent ‘name squatting’. Names can be forwarded to the Human Rights Commission for their approval if any uncertainty exists as to whether a name is offensive or not. Except for the restrictions mentioned above, there will be no further administrative discretion to reject names as is found in the Companies Act, 1973. In particular:
As regards associated names, the Commission will require proof from the associated company that a similar name is to be allowed.
It is a criminal offence to contravene the following protective measures:
Meetings and notices
Meetings are regulated in terms of section 62 of the Companies Act, 2008. As regards attendance of meetings, the Act provides that shareholders can be represented by way of a written proxy, which is valid for one year. Physical attendance is not mandatory, and meetings may be conducted entirely by electronic communication. Alternatively, some members may participate in this manner. The requirement is that they must be able to communicate simultaneously. Notice periods for meetings are as follows:
The rights of debenture holders can be altered only by resolution of the debenture holders. The Act provides that the majority for a special resolution, such as to amend the MoI, is 75% of shares. The majority for an ordinary resolution is 51%. The MoI can alter these percentages, but not lower than 65% for a special resolution or higher than 60% for an ordinary resolution. The quorum for all resolutions is 25% of voting shares.
Duties of directors
Directors need to know their rights and must be aware of what is expected of them. They are subject to the common law as found in court rulings and judgments.
The Companies Act, 2008 introduces a partial codification of directors’ duties. These duties include both a fiduciary duty and a duty of reasonable care, which operate in addition to the existing common law duties. Section 76, in particular, requires a director to act in good faith and for a proper purpose in the best interests of the company. A director should furthermore act with the degree of care, skill and diligence that may reasonably be expected of a person carrying out such functions and having the same skill and experience of that director – the reasonable man/woman test.
Directors are required to disclose any “personal financial interests”. They may not use their position as director or information gained as a director to make a secret profit or gain advantage for themselves or someone else or to cause harm or detriment to the company. The Act deals comprehensively with the election, disqualification, vacancies, removal, meetings, resolutions and liabilities of directors.
Accountability and transparency
Flexible regime
The Companies Act, 2008 aims to provide a flexible regime that balances accountability and transparency, with less of a regulatory burden. To that end, it sets certain common requirements for all companies. Differentiated requirements depend on the company’s wider responsibility to the public and the social and economic impact that the company’s operations have. This flexibility is illustrated by the following provisions:
Rotation of Auditors
The same individual may not serve as the auditor or designated auditor of a company for more than five consecutive financial years. So too, if an individual stops being the auditor or designated auditor of a company after two or more consecutive years, he or she may not be appointed as such again for at least five more financial years.
Audit Committees
Public companies and state-owned enterprises must appoint audit committees at each annual general meeting. The Act prescribes the duties of an audit committee, which include determining the fees to be paid to the auditor and the auditor’s terms of engagement.
Appointment of a Company Secretary
A private company will generally not need to appoint a company secretary. However, public companies and state-owned companies are obliged to appoint company secretaries, and the Act prescribes their duties. These include the following:
If a person is not eligible to be a company secretary in terms of the Act, that person will be regarded as having resigned when the Act becomes effective. So too, if a company does not have a secretary as required by the Act, the position must be filled once it becomes effective. If the company secretary is removed from office, the secretary may require the company to include a statement by the secretary in that year’s annual financial statements about the circumstances surrounding the removal.
Company finance
The Act provides for a shift from a capital maintenance regime based on par value to one based on solvency and liquidity. Shares will no longer have a nominal or par value, and the board may issue authorised shares only for consideration or other benefit to the company.
Existing par value shares remain valid for so long as they are in existence, and regulations govern the transition of such shares to the new regime. The solvency and liquidity test consists of two parts:
The interests of minority shareholders are still protected in that shareholders also have to approve share and option issues to directors and other specified persons, or financial assistance for share purchase, or any financial assistance to a director or related person. The solvency and liquidity test must be satisfied if:
Offers of shares to the public by public companies are subject to some modifications to ensure closer correlation with stock exchange requirements.
Company governance
The Act, 2008 introduces changes to company governance to enhance flexibility, while retaining much of the existing regime designed to promote transparency and accountability. In particular, the Act:
Business rescue regime
The Act, 2008 replaces the existing regime of judicial administration of failing companies with a modern business rescue (BR) regime. This regime is largely self-administered by the company, under independent supervision within constraints set out in the Act, and subject to court intervention at any time on application by any of the stakeholders.
To ensure the integrity and effectiveness of supervisors contemplated by the Act, provision has been made for the Minister to designate a suitable association to regulate the functions of persons seeking to be appointed, or acting as supervisors. The Act recognises the interests of stakeholders in general, such as shareholders, creditors and employees, and provides for their respective participation in the development and approval of a BR plan. Notably, the Act protects the interests of employees and workers by:
BR proceedings begin when the board passes a resolution that the company voluntarily begins BR proceedings, or when an affected person, such as a shareholder, creditor, employee or organised labour, applies to court for BR proceedings. For a company to qualify for the BR process, no liquidation proceedings must have commenced against the company. The process includes the following steps:
Remedies
The High Court remains the principal forum for remedies in terms of the Act. The Act establishes new general principles, including an extended right to commence an action on behalf of an aggrieved person and a regime to protect ‘whistle blowers’ who disclose irregularities or contraventions of the Act. These new principles have been formulated to harmonise with the protections already afforded to employees under the Protected Disclosures Act, No. 26 of 2000. As well as retaining existing remedies, the Act introduces:
Enforcement
The Act decriminalises company law. The few remaining offences include those arising out of the falsification of records or documents; the publishing of untrue or misleading information; the refusal to respond to a summons or give evidence; perjury; and similar matters relating to the administration of justice in terms of the Act.
Any such offences must be referred by the Commission to the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) for trial in the Magistrate’s Court. Generally, the Act uses a system of administrative enforcement in place of criminal sanctions to ensure compliance with the Act. The Commission or Panel may receive complaints from any stakeholder or may initiate a complaint itself or act on a matter as directed by the Minister. Following an investigation into a complaint, the Commission or Panel may:
A compliance order may be issued against a company or against an individual if the individual was implicated in the contravention of the Act. A person who has been issued a compliance notice may of course challenge it before the Companies Tribunal, and in court, but failing that, is obliged to satisfy the conditions of the notice. If he or she fails to do so, the Commission may either apply to a court for an administrative fine, or refer the failure to the National Prosecuting Authority as an offence.
In the case of a company that has failed to comply, been fined, and continues to contravene the Act, the Commission or Panel may apply to a court for an order dissolving the company. Finally, to improve corporate accountability, the Act proposes that it will be an offence, punishable by a fine or up to 10 years’ imprisonment, for a person to sign or agree to a false or misleading set of financial statements or prospectus, or to be reckless in the conduct of a company’s business.
Contact details
For further information or enquiries related to the Companies Act, Contact:
M Mnyatheli
Chief Director: Office of Company and Intellectual Property Enforcement (OCIPE), the DTI
Tel.: (012) 394 1505
Fax: (012) 394 2505
E-mail: MMnyatheli@thedti.gov.za
M Vimba
Director: Education and Capacity Building, OCIPE, the DTI
Tel.: (012) 394 1523
Fax: (012) 394 2523
E-mail: MVimba@thedti.gov.za
Tags: Act, Companies, DTI, advice, compliance, vimba
Views: 2258
Gerrie van Biljon – Executive Director Business Partners Limited
Technology changes at a rapid rate, but is this the same for the business world? You bet! If you think that…
Continue-
Gerrie van Biljon – Executive Director Business Partners Limited
The way in which you run your business is often based on what you believe made it a success in the first place. Your plan of action is based on the credence that what…
Continue-
© 2012 Created by Webmaster.
