In the past few years, the impact of COVID-19 in South Africa has given rise to the need for business rescue proceedings for financially distressed businesses. Moreover, the looting, unrest, and floods in certain parts of South Africa have exacerbated businesses’ financial stress. To help financially distressed companies in South Africa, the Companies Act 71 of 2008 has introduced a business rescue procedure aimed at helping these ailing companies. This mechanism aims to rehabilitate financially distressed companies so that they become solvent again and, if that is not possible, yield a better return for the company’s creditors or shareholders than would result from the immediate liquidation of the company. Unfortunately, since the introduction of business rescue, evidence has shown that sometimes companies resort to business rescue proceedings to seek refuge from creditors even if the facts do not justify that the company should commence business rescue. In most cases, the abuse of business rescue is done by directors who pass a resolution that the company should embark on business rescue even if evidence shows that the company should not commence the proceedings. This is done notwithstanding the principles of the King IV Report on Corporate Governance™ (King IV™), which requires ethics and good governance on the part of directors. This article demonstrates how the abuse of business rescue can impact the principles of good governance and ethics of King IV™. It argues that directors should rethink their corporate practices and ethical standards when passing a resolution to commence business rescue proceedings.
{"title":"Abusing business rescue proceedings by a director and its impact on King IV™ ethics of good corporate governance","authors":"Simphiwe P Phungula","doi":"10.47348/jccl/v9/i1a2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47348/jccl/v9/i1a2","url":null,"abstract":"In the past few years, the impact of COVID-19 in South Africa has given rise to the need for business rescue proceedings for financially distressed businesses. Moreover, the looting, unrest, and floods in certain parts of South Africa have exacerbated businesses’ financial stress. To help financially distressed companies in South Africa, the Companies Act 71 of 2008 has introduced a business rescue procedure aimed at helping these ailing companies. This mechanism aims to rehabilitate financially distressed companies so that they become solvent again and, if that is not possible, yield a better return for the company’s creditors or shareholders than would result from the immediate liquidation of the company. Unfortunately, since the introduction of business rescue, evidence has shown that sometimes companies resort to business rescue proceedings to seek refuge from creditors even if the facts do not justify that the company should commence business rescue. In most cases, the abuse of business rescue is done by directors who pass a resolution that the company should embark on business rescue even if evidence shows that the company should not commence the proceedings. This is done notwithstanding the principles of the King IV Report on Corporate Governance™ (King IV™), which requires ethics and good governance on the part of directors. This article demonstrates how the abuse of business rescue can impact the principles of good governance and ethics of King IV™. It argues that directors should rethink their corporate practices and ethical standards when passing a resolution to commence business rescue proceedings.","PeriodicalId":476166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Corporate and Commercial Law & Practice The","volume":"367 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135448029","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The premise that non-executive directors acting independently from management is essential to the integrity of the company board has driven much of the corporate governance agenda for decades. This is the case, despite conflicting empirical evidence of the value or contribution of independent non-executives. In addition, the exact meaning of ‘independence’ in the context of the corporate board remains opaque, and expectations regarding the role and remit of the office are far from settled. This article elaborates on some of these themes. The discussion will introduce the reader to the salient concepts and offer an overview of the most prominent discourse and recent developments with reference to approaches in the United States, the United Kingdom, the European Union and other jurisdictions. Ultimately, the paper contributes to the ongoing debate surrounding the efficacy of the independent non-executive director as a critical oversight mechanism in good corporate governance and the extent to which regulation can and should scaffold the office.
{"title":"The independent non-executive director: Origins, regulation and persistent challenges","authors":"Helena Stoop-Koornhof","doi":"10.47348/jccl/v9/i1a4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47348/jccl/v9/i1a4","url":null,"abstract":"The premise that non-executive directors acting independently from management is essential to the integrity of the company board has driven much of the corporate governance agenda for decades. This is the case, despite conflicting empirical evidence of the value or contribution of independent non-executives. In addition, the exact meaning of ‘independence’ in the context of the corporate board remains opaque, and expectations regarding the role and remit of the office are far from settled. This article elaborates on some of these themes. The discussion will introduce the reader to the salient concepts and offer an overview of the most prominent discourse and recent developments with reference to approaches in the United States, the United Kingdom, the European Union and other jurisdictions. Ultimately, the paper contributes to the ongoing debate surrounding the efficacy of the independent non-executive director as a critical oversight mechanism in good corporate governance and the extent to which regulation can and should scaffold the office.","PeriodicalId":476166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Corporate and Commercial Law & Practice The","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135448316","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
James J Hanks Jr, Hirsh M Ament, Judah L Rosenblatt
None
{"title":"Practice note: Supreme Court of Maryland overrules prior distinction between director’s managerial and non-managerial duties and reaffirms that the MGCL is the ‘sole source’ of director duties to the corporation and its stockholders","authors":"James J Hanks Jr, Hirsh M Ament, Judah L Rosenblatt","doi":"10.47348/jccl/v9/i1a5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47348/jccl/v9/i1a5","url":null,"abstract":"<jats:p>None</jats:p>","PeriodicalId":476166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Corporate and Commercial Law & Practice The","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135448030","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Every rule should be valuable to the law. More so if the rule affects the commercial interest of society. A rule may be adopted or formulated to regulate commercial transactions, particularly to support the efficiency of the market. The market price rule is formulated to measure the degree of damages a contract defaulter should pay. The rule should indeed be applied consistently and reasonably to avoid uncertainty and unfairness. It follows that the market value as a rule and measure of commercial liability should not escape analysis to determine its limitations and value in contracts of sale. Thus, this article aims to provide a thorough discourse on the market price rule and how it should be applied in contracts of sale. The purpose of this article is to provide a comprehensive exposition of what informs the market price and how the market price affects the determination of damages in contracts of sale.
{"title":"The value of the market price in contracts of sale: an analysis","authors":"Paul Nkoane","doi":"10.47348/jccl/v9/i1a1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47348/jccl/v9/i1a1","url":null,"abstract":"Every rule should be valuable to the law. More so if the rule affects the commercial interest of society. A rule may be adopted or formulated to regulate commercial transactions, particularly to support the efficiency of the market. The market price rule is formulated to measure the degree of damages a contract defaulter should pay. The rule should indeed be applied consistently and reasonably to avoid uncertainty and unfairness. It follows that the market value as a rule and measure of commercial liability should not escape analysis to determine its limitations and value in contracts of sale. Thus, this article aims to provide a thorough discourse on the market price rule and how it should be applied in contracts of sale. The purpose of this article is to provide a comprehensive exposition of what informs the market price and how the market price affects the determination of damages in contracts of sale.","PeriodicalId":476166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Corporate and Commercial Law & Practice The","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135448028","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A recent judgment in an application for a final order of compulsory sequestration provided startling justification for granting the order even if the debtor’s estate has no assets that would provide a pecuniary benefit and prospect of a dividend for creditors by relying in part on s 39(2) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 and extensive quotations from two Constitutional Court decisions on other topics. The connections between the scope, purport and objects mentioned in s 39(2) and the subject matter of the case were not stated by the court but left to the reader to imagine and construct. Possible lines of justification are ventured in this article. The judgment’s vision of radically reimagining the South African law of insolvency is based on misapplying s 12(1)(c) of the Insolvency Act 24 of 1936. In possible moves towards reforming South African insolvency law by abandoning the requirement of advantage to creditors in a new statute, it would be essential for the legislature to canvass detailed, well-informed, carefully considered research and guidance by experts on South African social, economic and financial policy in the current circumstances.
{"title":"Reimagining a new world of South African Insolvency Law: Advantage to creditors and section 39(2) of the constitution","authors":"Alastair Smith","doi":"10.47348/jccl/v9/i1a3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47348/jccl/v9/i1a3","url":null,"abstract":"A recent judgment in an application for a final order of compulsory sequestration provided startling justification for granting the order even if the debtor’s estate has no assets that would provide a pecuniary benefit and prospect of a dividend for creditors by relying in part on s 39(2) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 and extensive quotations from two Constitutional Court decisions on other topics. The connections between the scope, purport and objects mentioned in s 39(2) and the subject matter of the case were not stated by the court but left to the reader to imagine and construct. Possible lines of justification are ventured in this article. The judgment’s vision of radically reimagining the South African law of insolvency is based on misapplying s 12(1)(c) of the Insolvency Act 24 of 1936. In possible moves towards reforming South African insolvency law by abandoning the requirement of advantage to creditors in a new statute, it would be essential for the legislature to canvass detailed, well-informed, carefully considered research and guidance by experts on South African social, economic and financial policy in the current circumstances.","PeriodicalId":476166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Corporate and Commercial Law & Practice The","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135448027","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：