Purpose

A company that is registered with share capital may issue different classes of shares and may confer rights on members, which place them in different classes in the company’s organisational structure. This paper is concerned with the propensity for encroachment on such vested class rights as companies strive to wriggle out of business challenges spawn by the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this study is to ascertain the extent of protection that the law accords to the different classes of shareholders and members in a company especially when the company seeks to vary the vested class rights.

Design/methodology/approach

A doctrinal methodology, which relies on existing literature, case law and statutory instruments, is adopted to explore the nature of class rights and the adequacies of the remedial measures availed by statute to the aggrieved bearers of class rights in the context of the South African Companies Act 71 of 2008 with inferences drawn from the UK companies statute and case law.

Findings

The findings indicate that accessing the remedies available to aggrieved shareholders under the relevant statutory provisions are fraught with conditionality, which could make them elusive to those who may seek to rely on such provisions to vindicate any encroachment on their class rights.

Practical implications

The paper embodies cogent information on the interpretation and application of the relevant statutory provisions geared at the protection of shareholders class rights, which should serve as guides to companies and the courts in dealing with matters that affect the vested class rights of shareholders and members of a company.

Originality/value

The paper shows that protections offered to classes of shareholders under the law can also be extended to classes of members who are not necessarily shareholders, and that shareholders who seek to vindicate their class rights may conveniently rely on Section 163 that provides for unfair prejudice remedy to avoid the onerous conditions under Section 164 of the South African Companies Act 71 of 2008, which directly deals with class rights.

中文翻译：

---

公司法对股东类别权利的保护

目的

以股本注册的公司可以发行不同类别的股份，并可以向成员授予权利，从而将他们置于公司组织结构中的不同类别中。本文关注的是随着公司努力摆脱 COVID-19 大流行带来的业务挑战，这种既得阶级权利被侵犯的倾向。本研究的目的是确定法律对公司不同类别股东和成员的保护程度，尤其是当公司寻求改变既得类别权利时。

设计/方法/方法

采用一种依赖于现有文献、判例法和法定文书的教义方法来探讨南非公司背景下阶级权利的性质以及成文法对阶级权利的受害承担者所采取的补救措施的充分性2008 年第 71 号法案，根据英国公司法规和判例法作出推论。

发现

调查结果表明，根据相关法定条款获得受害股东可用的补救措施充满了条件，这可能使那些可能寻求依赖此类条款来证明其类别权利受到侵犯的人难以捉摸。

实际影响

该文件包含了有关保护股东类别权利的相关法律条文的解释和适用的有说服力的信息，应为公司和法院处理影响股东和股东的既得类别权利的事项提供指导。公司。

原创性/价值

该文件表明，根据法律向股东类别提供的保护也可以扩展到不一定是股东的成员类别，寻求维护其类别权利的股东可以方便地依赖第 163 条，该条款规定了对股东的不公平损害补救措施。避免 2008 年第 71 号南非公司法第 164 条规定的繁重条件，该条直接涉及集体权利。