Case Summary: Borland’s Trustee v Steel Bros & Co Ltd

 

Welcome to the My Easy LLB Namibian Law Blog!
This case featured a dispute surrounding the enforceability of a company's articles of association and the nature of a share. This is a historical company law case and in order to capture the principles it laid down, the following case summary will deviate from the standard format. Use this to help you study but never use our case summaries as your sole source of reading 😉✌ (Tip: Use the sidebar to browse other case summaries on this subject)

Facts

  • Steel Bros' articles of association stated that if a member thereof went bankrupt, their shares would be transferred to other shareholders at a fair price below par value;
  • Borland (a shareholder of Steel Bros) went bankrupt and his trustee was informed of the transfer of his shares;
  • Borland's trustee argued that Steel Bros' articles of association were void because they compromised ownership and property, which tend to perpetuity (i.e. to be endless and flow constantly).

Issues

Were the articles of association void for the reason given by Borland's trustee?

Main Principles laid down

One: The contract created by a company's articles of association exists prior to the rights created by the purchase of a share and, therefore, takes precedence over those rights.

Two: A share is the interest of a shareholder in the company measured by a sum of money, for the purposes of liability in the first place and interest in the second, but also consisting of a mutual set of covenants entered into by all the shareholders inter se.

Analysis

Farwell J reasoned that a simple stipulation in a company's articles of association that a member's shares would be transferred to another shareholder upon the former's becoming bankrupt is not a violation of the policy of the bankrupt law. He stated that the articles are a commercial agreement and moreso a fair agreement for the management of the company's business. They were binding on all the company's shareholders, as opposed to Borland being singled out unfairly and, thus, there was no question of fraudulent preference against him.

As to the matter of the transfer of the shares of a bankrupt member being done below par value, it was stated that "the price was a fixed sum for all persons alike, and no difference in price arose in the case of bankruptcy...it would have been different if there were any provision in the articles compelling persons to sell their shares in the event of bankruptcy at something less than the price that they would have otherwise obtained".

Upon this reasoning, the articles of association were deemed to be valid and their transfer, in the way it had been carried out, was permissible. The binding contract that is created when a member agrees to be bound by a company's articles of association exists before, and thus takes precedence over, the rights that come about as a result of the purchase of shares.

The court also laid down the meaning of a share, that is, the interest of a shareholder in a company measured by a sum of money for the purpose of (i) liability and (ii) interest. A share consists of covenants entered into by shareholders inter se and must be fully paid for before transfer can take place.

Holding

It was held, therefore, that the articles of association were valid.🍎





Popular posts from this blog

Case Summary: Pinchin and Another NO v Santam Insurance Co Ltd

Case Note: Chisholm v East Rand Proprietary Mines Ltd