The question arises whether section 162 of our Companies Act of 2008, which dealt inter alia with. It may become even more powerful when read in combination with the section of the Act dealing with directors' duties (ss 76 and 77) and s424 of the Companies Act, No 61 of 1973 (dealing with fraudulent and reckless trading). Section 218 of the Act is therefore hugely significant as it enables persons who allege they have suffered losses to found such claims provided that they can link such losses to a contravention of any provision of the Act. The court dismissed these arguments, reinforcing what has already been established in common law: section 218 imposes liability on any person who contravenes any provision of the Act and by so doing causes that person to suffer a loss. The defendants tried to invoke various legal arguments to have the claim based on section 218(2) dismissed at the exception stage. In the alternative, the claimant claimed that the defendants contravened section 76(3) of the Act by acting recklessly, and further in the alternative that the defendants were liable to the claimant for the loss they had suffered in terms of section 218(2). In suing the defendants, the claimant argued that the defendants had a duty of care not to make the representations to the claimant unless they were correct in all material respects.
Things did not go according to plan and the claimant lost money. The claimant engaged in transactions as a result of representations made by the defendants. The court was faced with a complex transaction concerning buying and selling of financial instruments based on debts. The terms of law do not come wider than this: the gist of the section means that any person, including shareholders, directors and creditors could use it to claim back a loss caused by any other persons for any contravention of the Act. " The High Court had cause recently to consider this legislation in Sanlam Capital Markets v Mettle Manco 2014 (3) All SA 454 (GJ). " Section 218(2) provides that: " Any person who contravenes any provision of this Act is liable to any other person for any loss or damage suffered by that person as a result of that contravention. Richard Marcus of CLIFFE DEKKER HOFMEYR ATTORNEYS on the 13 th of July 2016 under the heading " Lurking in the back of the Companies Act is a potentially devastating provision " which can be read on the webpage: worded inter alia as follows: " Lurking in the back of the Companies Act, No 71 of 2008 (Act) is a potentially very devastating provision. Various attorney's firms have in the past published articles in which they have discussed the stipulations of Section 218(2) of South Africa's Companies Act of 2008 of which I am going herewith to refer to and quote inter alia certain contents of these articles as follows: The contents of an article written by Mr. " In terms of the law as stipulated under section 1 " Definitions " of the Companies Act of 2008, a " " person " includes a juristic person ". Section 218(2) provides that: " Any person who contravenes any provision of this Act is liable to any other person for any loss or damage suffered by that person as a result of that contravention. more In this article I am going to visit and discuss the stipulations of Section 218(2) of South Africa's Companies Act of 2008 in a search for a remedy which shareholders can use to recover their losses regarding the now familiar Steinhoff debacle. In this article I am going to visit and discuss the stipulations of Section 218(2) of South Afric.
0 kommentar(er)
