Confusion in the Judicial Review of Board Decisions to Remove Directors Under Section 71 of the Companies Act 71 of 2008

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2025/v28i0a22018

Keywords:

Company Law, removal of directors by the board of directors, section 71(5) of the Companies Act 71 of 2008, judicial review of the board's decision to remove a director, types of judicial review, awarding of costs in a section 71(5) review application

Abstract

A significant innovation of the Companies Act 71 of 2008, contained in section 71(3), is that the board of directors of companies is empowered to remove directors from office. Within 20 business days, directors so removed may apply to court under section 71(5) of the Companies Act to have the board's decision reviewed. Section 71(5) is an essential remedy for directors. More than ten years after the promulgation of the Companies Act, South African courts are beginning to develop the jurisprudence on the interpretation of section 71(5). This article examines recent cases in which courts had to interpret section 71(5) of the Companies Act. It discusses the following issues that these cases canvassed: (i) whether the board's power to remove a director under section 71(3) of the Companies Act constitutes administrative action and whether the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of 2000 applies to the review of these decisions under section 71(5) of the Companies Act; (ii) the ambit of a section 71(5) review and whether courts may review both the procedural aspects and the merits of the board's decision; (iii) the trigger for the 20-business-day period to run; (iv) whether a court may condone a section 71(5) review application brought after the 20 business days expire; and (v) the awarding of costs in a successful section 71(5) review. As this article shows, courts have disagreed with and contradicted one another on the correct interpretation of section 71(5). This disagreement has confused our law regarding the judicial review of board decisions to remove directors.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

  • Rehana Cassim, University of South Africa

    BA (cum laude) LLB (cum laude) LLM (cum laude) (Witwatersrand) LLD (Unisa). Professor, Department of Mercantile Law, University of South Africa, South Africa. Attorney and Notary Public of the High Court of South Africa, 

References

Literature

Cassim R "Contesting the Removal of a Director under the Companies Act" 2016 SALJ 133-159

Cassim R "A Critical Analysis of the Judicial Review Procedures under Section 71 of the Companies Act 71 of 2008" 2018 SA Merc LJ 302-329

Cassim R "A Critical Analysis of the Grounds of Removal of a Director by the Board of Directors under the Companies Act 71 of 2008" 2019 SALJ 513-549

Cassim R "Confusion in the Removal of Directors by Shareholders under the Companies Act 71 of 2008: Miller v Natmed (Pty) Ltd" 2022 SALJ 741-756 DOI: https://doi.org/10.47348/SALJ/v139/i4a1

Cassim R The Removal of Directors and Delinquency Orders under the South African Companies Act (Juta Cape Town 2020)

Cassim FHI et al Contemporary Company Law 3rd ed (Juta Claremont 2021)

Delport P Henochsberg on the Companies Act 71 of 2008 vol 1 (LexisNexis Durban 2011)

Hoexter C and Penfold G Administrative Law in South Africa 3rd ed (Juta Claremont 2021)

Konstant A "Administrative Action, the Principle of Legality and Deference – The Case of Minister of Defence and Military Veterans v Motau" 2015 CCR 68-90 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2989/CCR/2015.0004

Ncube C "You're Fired! The Removal of Directors under the Companies Act 71 of 2008" 2011 SALJ 33-51

Case law

Antoy Investments v Rand Water Board 2008 JDR 0290 (SCA)

Ayres v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services 2022 2 SACR 123 (CC)

Bato Star Fishing (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism 2004 4 SA 490 (CC)

Bertie van Zyl (Pty) Ltd v Minister for Safety and Security 2010 2 SA 181 (CC)

Camps Bay Ratepayers' and Residents' Association v Harrison 2011 4 SA 42 (CC)

Dawnlaan Beleggings (Edms) Bpk v Johannesburg Stock Exchange 1983 3 SA 344 (W)

Fedsure Life Assurance Ltd v Greater Johannesburg Transitional Metropolitan Council 1999 1 SA 374 (CC)

Gauteng Provincial Legislature v Kilian 2001 2 SA 68 (SCA)

Gelb v Hawkins 1960 3 SA 687 (A)

Intercontinental Exports (Pty) Ltd v Fowles 1999 2 SA 1045 (SCA)

Jockey Club of South Africa v Forbes 1993 1 SA 649 (A)

Johannesburg Consolidated Investment Co v Johannesburg Town Council 1903 TS 111

Jones v Delport 2025 2 SA 193 (GP) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2025.2508095

Jones v Delport (GP) (unreported) case number 2023/082594 of 20 November 2024

Langeni v South African Women in Mining Association 2023 JDR 4387 (GJ)

Litabe v Di Thabeng Wholesale Fuel Supply (Pty) Ltd 2023 JDR 3808 (FB)

Miller v Natmed Defence (Pty) Ltd 2022 2 SA 554 (GJ)

Minister of Defence and Military Veterans v Motau 2014 5 SA 69 (CC)

Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism v Phambili Fisheries (Pty) Ltd; Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism v Bato Star Fishing (Pty) Ltd 2003 6 SA 407 (SCA)

Minister of Health v New Clicks South Africa (Pty) Ltd 2006 2 SA 311 (CC)

Nel v The Master 2005 1 SA 276 (SCA)

Nxumalo v Mavundla 2000 4 SA 349 (D)

Nzimande v Nzimande 2005 1 SA 83 (W)

Patmar Explorations (Pty) Ltd v Limpopo Development Tribunal 2018 4 SA 107 (SCA)

Pennington v Friedgood 2002 1 SA 251 (C)

Peter v Mimosa Court Shareblock RF (Pty) Ltd (7651/2024) [2024] ZAWCHC 242 (5 September 2024)

Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association of SA: In re Ex Parte President of the Republic of South Africa 2000 2 SA 674 (CC)

Pityana v Absa Group Limited 2024 1 SA 491 (GP)

President of the Republic of South Africa v South African Rugby Football Union 2000 1 SA 1 (CC)

Pretorius v Timcke (15479/14) [2015] ZAWCHC 215 (2 June 2015) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/apha.12589

Rustenburg Platinum Mines Ltd (Rustenburg Section) v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration 2007 1 SA 576 (SCA)

S v Baleka 1986 1 SA 361 (T)

Thuketana v Health Professions Council of South Africa 2003 2 SA 628 (T)

Tikly v Johannes 1963 2 SA 588 (T)

Twala v MEC for Education, Eastern Cape 2016 2 SA 425 (ECB)

Wait v Marais (1707/2021) [2022] ZAECQBHC 41 (1 November 2022)

Wanderers Club v Boyes-Moffat 2012 3 SA 641 (GSJ)

Ward v Sulzer 1973 3 SA 701 (A)

Weir v Wiehahn Formwork Solutions (Pty) Ltd (19494/2024) [2025] ZAWCHC 74 (4 March 2025)

Legislation

Companies Act 61 of 1973

Companies Act 71 of 2008

Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996

Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of 2000

Government publications

GN R48 in GG 999 of 12 January 1965 (Uniform Rules of Court, 1965, as amended)

Published

29-10-2025

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Cassim, R. (2025). Confusion in the Judicial Review of Board Decisions to Remove Directors Under Section 71 of the Companies Act 71 of 2008. Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal, 28, (Published on 29 October 2025) pp 1-28. https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2025/v28i0a22018

Similar Articles

1-10 of 1245

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.