Judgment reveals the limits of financial assistance definitions in companies, highlighting significant misconceptions.
In Constantia Insurance Co Ltd v Master, Johannesburg High Court 2023 (5) SA 88 (SCA), the Supreme Court of Appeal considered the prohibition against giving financial assistance to directors and related companies, as provided for in s 45 of the Companies Act 71 of 2008. The term ‘financial assistance’ is at the heart of s 45. Controversially, the Supreme Court of Appeal asserted that the list of three financial-assistance transactions referred to in s 45(1)(a) is exhaustive of the meaning of ‘financial assistance’. This note submits that by misconstruing the concept of ‘financial assistance’, the Constantia judgment imprudently truncates the scope of the prohibition in s 45 and frustrates the fundamentally important objectives that it is designed to achieve. Serious practical ramifications may be expected to arise. The Constantia judgment does, however, sound a timely warning to innocent third parties who deal with companies in transactions connected with the giving of financial assistance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Maleka Femida Cassim (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: