Abstract
This note critically analyses the judgment in Miller v Natmed Defence (Pty) Ltd 2022 (2) SA 554 (GJ), in which the court ruled on the validity of the removal of a director by the company’s sole shareholder. Three issues were in contention: whether a shareholder must furnish the director with reasons for the proposed resolution to remove a director from office under s 71 of the Companies Act 71 of 2008; whether a shorter notice period for the shareholders’ meeting was legally acceptable; and whether the meeting that was held telephonically was valid. The court ruled that the director’s removal from office was valid and dismissed his request to be reinstated as a director. This note critically analyses the judgment and argues that the court misinterpreted some aspects of s 71 of the Act.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callSimilar Papers
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
