Personal liability of non-executive directors in South Africa: A global comparative analysis

AuthorDanha, M.D.
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.47348/JCCL/V8/i1a2
Published date10 November 2022
Date10 November 2022
Citation(2022) 8(1) JCCL&P 21
Pages21-34
https://doi.org/10.47348/JCCL/V8/i1a2
21
PERSONAL LIABILITY OF NON-
EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS IN SOUTH
AFRICA: A GLOBAL COMPARATIVE
ANALYSIS
MUTSA D DANHA*
Tutor and LLM candidate
Learning Space Tuition and Wits Law School
ABSTRACT
The South African Companies Act 71 of 2008 (SA Companies Act)
contains extensive provisions detailing the circumstances under
which directors may be held personally liable for their actions
completed while carrying out their duties. These statutory provisions
are a partial codification and modernisation of the existing common-
law provisions that had previously regulated this area of company
law. These provisions still apply to the extent that they comply with
the Act’s statutory provisions. The common-law tradition in South
African company law has its roots in the English common law,
which has spawned many other legal traditions, from that applicable
in Australia to the tradition that has emerged (and diverged) in the
United States of America.
This article examines whether, in applying the statutory provisions
of the SA Companies Act, the manner in which personal liability
may be ascribed to directors would amount to a standard more
onerous than jurisdictions with similar legal traditions to South
Africa and, as such, render the position of director in South Africa as
(comparatively) undesirable.
A further examination of whether a director is an executive or
a non-executive director is relevant to establish whether liability
will ensue and to confirm the position in South African law on this
matter. Some of the distinctions between such directors are laid out
in the seminal case of Kaimowitz v Delahunt.
Overall, this article seeks to ascertain whether the trajectory of
South African company law is aligned with the modern forms of
the same law that have evolved in its ‘sibling jurisdictions’ (legally
speaking). It further seeks to establish whether any variance thereof
* BCom, LLB (Wits).
(2022) 8(1) JCCL&P 21
© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT