Private companies and the restriction on transferability of shares

A requirement of the previous Companies Act of 1973 was that a private company must restrict the ‘right to transfer’ its shares, by way of the company’s articles of association, however, more recent legislation (Companies Act 71 of 2008) revised this. Now, a Memorandum of Incorporation (MOI) of a private company must restrict the transferability of any company’s ‘securities’ which includes both instruments such as shares as well as debt instruments such as debentures.

The ins and outs of subject to bond approval clauses

While the free transferability of securities must be dealt with in the MOI and it cannot be amended to exclude this, the manner or form of restriction is not prescribed.

How are restrictions dealt with in an MOI?

The restriction can be achieved in one of the following ways: 

  1. By means of a right of pre-emption under the company’s constitution (the MOI and possibly company rules and shareholders agreement if they exist). In simple terms, such restriction means that when a shareholder (offeror) wants to sell shares, these must be offered to the other shareholders (offeree/s) in the company first at an agreed or pre-determined price. This offer is typically pro-rated in terms of shareholding percentages. If the remaining shareholders decide not to buy the shares on offer, the offeror can then sell his shares to a third party. Shareholder agreements normally make provision for pre-emption and restrictions, some setting out the exact formulae that must be used in the case of a sale to remaining shareholders and the process to be followed if and when a sale by one of the shareholders is considered. In addition, shares may be transferred to a non-shareholder only with the approval of the company’s board of directors, and in some cases the transfer of shares could be subject to the approval of the other shareholders which, in essence, also comes down to a pre-emptive condition. When it comes to pre-emptive rights and restrictions, it is important to note that should these provisions contradict the Act or the MOI, the latter will take precedence and the provisions will be invalid. Similarly, if the restriction is not complied with, the transfer will be void.
  2. ‘Come along’ clauses: Where a ‘come along’ clause has been included, any offer for all the issued shares of the company on identical pro rata terms will proceed once approved by 70% of the shareholder vote and the ‘minority’ shareholders will be deemed to have accepted the offer. This serves to provide the desired outcome based on a majority vote, however, this may not be in line with shareholder minority rights that the Act also makes provision for. Justification for this is made based on the principles of democracy. 
  3. ‘Tag along’ clause: In a situation where a ‘tag along’ clause is included, if a third party makes an offer for 70% or more of the issued shares (provided pre-emptive conditions have been complied with) and the minority shareholders also wish to dispose of their shares, the offerees will not be entitled to sell their shares unless the same pro-rata offer is made to the minority shareholders by the third party. This principle offers increased protection to the minority shareholders. 

When it comes to pre-emptive rights, it is also worth noting a difference in a scenario where shares are purchased from an existing shareholder who wishes to dispose of his or her shares, and a scenario where one acquires shares in a company directory from the company itself (i.e. one subscribes for shares). The first is dealt with in terms of Section 8(2)(b) while the latter is dealt with in terms of Section 39 of the Companies Act. The pre-emptive rights in terms of Section 39 may be excluded from a companies MOI. 

Follow Snymans on Facebook for more legal information, tips and news about property.

Recommended for you

Property Blog Articles | Advice | Contractual Matters | Market News
Legislative Guidelines

SPLUMA certificates required for property transfers in Mpumalanga[post_view before=""]

SPLUMA stands for the Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act, and SPLUMA certificates are governed by the act together with the by-laws of each local municipality.

Read More
My name has changed - what happens to my property’s title deed?
Legislative Guidelines

Trust investments and the Legal Practice Act[post_view before=""]

The Legal Practice Act, which has replaced the Attorneys Act, has made some changes regarding monies paid into attorney trust accounts and the investment of this money on a client’s instructions.

Read More
Historical monuments and renovation restrictions
Legislative Guidelines

Destruction of a sectional title scheme: precautionary steps to take[post_view before=""]

There are several reasons why a landowner or developer may decide to build a new development in the place of an existing sectional title scheme. For example, the existing scheme may be dated and no longer suited to the area. Or the demand for residential units may be very high but the old development is undesirable.

Read More
My name has changed - what happens to my property’s title deed?
Legislative Guidelines

21 facts you should know about the POPI Act[post_view before=""]

On 1 July 2021, the Protection Of Personal Information Act 4 of 2013 (POPI Act) comes into full force and effect. While the Act was signed into law on 19 November 2013, the majority of its sections were only implemented on 1 July 2020, with a one-year grace period. Now, with the remaining sections coming into effect on 30 June 2021, the Act becomes enforceable by the Regulator.

Read More
Minors and immovable property
Legislative Guidelines

Court ruling: Can you sell a property that’s not in your name?[post_view before=""]

The recent judgement in the matter of Tomlinson and Another v Tomlinson N.O and Others (11764/2015) [2021] ZAKZDHC 8 (19 March 2021) in the Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban has drawn attention to whether someone is able to sell a property if he or she is not the registered owner.

Read More

Need more Snymans content?

Sign up for our monthly newsletter.

Private companies and the restriction on transferability of shares

A requirement of the previous Companies Act of 1973 was that a private company must restrict the ‘right to transfer’ its shares, by way of the company’s articles of association, however, more recent legislation (Companies Act 71 of 2008) revised this. Now, a Memorandum of Incorporation (MOI) of a private company must restrict the transferability of any company’s ‘securities’ which includes both instruments such as shares as well as debt instruments such as debentures.

The ins and outs of subject to bond approval clauses

While the free transferability of securities must be dealt with in the MOI and it cannot be amended to exclude this, the manner or form of restriction is not prescribed.

How are restrictions dealt with in an MOI?

The restriction can be achieved in one of the following ways: 

  1. By means of a right of pre-emption under the company’s constitution (the MOI and possibly company rules and shareholders agreement if they exist). In simple terms, such restriction means that when a shareholder (offeror) wants to sell shares, these must be offered to the other shareholders (offeree/s) in the company first at an agreed or pre-determined price. This offer is typically pro-rated in terms of shareholding percentages. If the remaining shareholders decide not to buy the shares on offer, the offeror can then sell his shares to a third party. Shareholder agreements normally make provision for pre-emption and restrictions, some setting out the exact formulae that must be used in the case of a sale to remaining shareholders and the process to be followed if and when a sale by one of the shareholders is considered. In addition, shares may be transferred to a non-shareholder only with the approval of the company’s board of directors, and in some cases the transfer of shares could be subject to the approval of the other shareholders which, in essence, also comes down to a pre-emptive condition. When it comes to pre-emptive rights and restrictions, it is important to note that should these provisions contradict the Act or the MOI, the latter will take precedence and the provisions will be invalid. Similarly, if the restriction is not complied with, the transfer will be void.
  2. ‘Come along’ clauses: Where a ‘come along’ clause has been included, any offer for all the issued shares of the company on identical pro rata terms will proceed once approved by 70% of the shareholder vote and the ‘minority’ shareholders will be deemed to have accepted the offer. This serves to provide the desired outcome based on a majority vote, however, this may not be in line with shareholder minority rights that the Act also makes provision for. Justification for this is made based on the principles of democracy. 
  3. ‘Tag along’ clause: In a situation where a ‘tag along’ clause is included, if a third party makes an offer for 70% or more of the issued shares (provided pre-emptive conditions have been complied with) and the minority shareholders also wish to dispose of their shares, the offerees will not be entitled to sell their shares unless the same pro-rata offer is made to the minority shareholders by the third party. This principle offers increased protection to the minority shareholders. 

When it comes to pre-emptive rights, it is also worth noting a difference in a scenario where shares are purchased from an existing shareholder who wishes to dispose of his or her shares, and a scenario where one acquires shares in a company directory from the company itself (i.e. one subscribes for shares). The first is dealt with in terms of Section 8(2)(b) while the latter is dealt with in terms of Section 39 of the Companies Act. The pre-emptive rights in terms of Section 39 may be excluded from a companies MOI. 

Follow Snymans on Facebook for more legal information, tips and news about property.