100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached 4.2 TrustPilot
logo-home
Exam (elaborations)

FBE2604 Assignment 2 (100% COMPLETE ANSWERS) Semester 1 2025 - DUE April 2025

Rating
-
Sold
-
Pages
10
Grade
A+
Uploaded on
15-02-2025
Written in
2024/2025

Forms of Business Enterprise - FBE2604 Assignment 2 (FULL ANSWERS) Semester 1 2025 - DUE April 2025 ;100 % TRUSTED workings, Expert Solved, Explanations and Solutions. For assistance call or W.h.a.t.s.a.p.p us on ...(.+.2.5.4.7.7.9.5.4.0.1.3.2)........... QUESTION 1 1.1 Briefly explian to two prospective businessmen, Thandeka and Mike, whether or not the requirements for piercing of the corporate veil in terms of the Companies Act 71 of 2008 and the Close Corporations Act 69 of 1984 are identical. Refer to case law in your answer. (5) 1.2 Frank is an IT specialist. He wishes to incorporate a company for his business. He does not want to offer any securities to the public. 1.2.1 Advise Frank on the type of company that would be the most suitable for his needs and briefly explain to him what the characteristics of such a company are. (5) 1.2.2 Frank sees an office space that will be perfect for his IT business. He wants to purchase this office space on behalf of the proposed company. Advise Frank regarding the requirements of the Companies Act 71 of 2008 that must be complied with when entering into a contract on behalf of a company that is yet to be incorporated for the contract to be binding on the company when it eventually gets incorporated. (5) 1.2.3 List the information that must be contained in a company’s Notice of Incorporation. (6) 1.2.4 Timothy is appointed as an agent for Frank’s company, Geeks Galore (Pty) Ltd, and is given an oral mandate to acquire new equipment for the company to the value of R 100 000. Timothy buys IT accessories to the value of R 30 000. Explain to Timothy whether he has actual authorty to bind the company. (6) FBE2604 1.2.5 Timothy intends to enter into a contract with Harrington (Pty) Ltd (RF). He has heard that the doctrine of constructive notice has been partly abolished by section 19(4) of the Companies Act 71 of 2008 and that there are two exceptions to this doctrine. List the two exceptions and explain to Timothy if any of the exceptions would apply to his transaction with Harrington (Pty) Ltd (RF). Pat and his two sons, Rick and Dave are discussing the legal attributes of a trust. Pat thinks that trusts have a separate legal existence. Rick is of the view that there is no distinction drawn between trust assets and private assets of the trustee even though a trustee is legally the owner of the trust assets. Dave on the other hand, holds the opinion that parties to a trust may lose more than what is held in the trust. They approach you for advice on the legal attributes of a trust. Advise them accordingly. (In your advice, define a trust, deal with each view as presented and then conclude).

Show more Read less









Whoops! We can’t load your doc right now. Try again or contact support.

Document information

Uploaded on
February 15, 2025
Number of pages
10
Written in
2024/2025
Type
Exam (elaborations)
Contains
Questions & answers

Subjects

Content preview

FBE2604
ASSIGNMENT 2 SEMESTER 1 2025
UNIQUE NO.
DUE DATE: APRIL 2025

, FBE2604

Assignment 2 Semester 1 2025



Unique Number:

Due Date: April 2025

Forms of Business Enterprise

QUESTION 1

1.1 Piercing the Corporate Veil: Comparison of the Companies Act 71 of 2008 and
the Close Corporations Act 69 of 1984

The requirements for piercing the corporate veil under the Companies Act 71 of 2008
and the Close Corporations Act 69 of 1984 are not identical.

Under section 20(9) of the Companies Act 71 of 2008, a court may disregard the
separate legal personality of a company where the incorporation or use of the company
constitutes an unconscionable abuse of its juristic personality. This is a broad test,
granting courts discretion in determining when to lift the corporate veil. Case law such
as Hülse-Reutter v Gödde 2001 (4) SA 1336 (SCA) illustrates how courts evaluate
whether abuse has occurred.

The Close Corporations Act 69 of 1984, under section 64, allows courts to hold
members personally liable where they carry on business recklessly, fraudulently, or with
intent to defraud creditors. This is a stricter test compared to the Companies Act. In
Airport Cold Storage (Pty) Ltd v Ebrahim 2008 (2) SA 303 (C), the court emphasized
that mere control or ownership does not justify lifting the veil unless fraud or gross
abuse is present.

1.2 Frank’s Business Incorporation

Get to know the seller

Seller avatar
Reputation scores are based on the amount of documents a seller has sold for a fee and the reviews they have received for those documents. There are three levels: Bronze, Silver and Gold. The better the reputation, the more your can rely on the quality of the sellers work.
LIBRARYpro University of South Africa (Unisa)
View profile
Follow You need to be logged in order to follow users or courses
Sold
10518
Member since
2 year
Number of followers
4904
Documents
4814
Last sold
6 days ago
LIBRARY

On this page, you find all documents, Package Deals, and Flashcards offered by seller LIBRARYpro (LIBRARY). Knowledge is Power. #You already got my attention!

3,7

1457 reviews

5
683
4
235
3
243
2
78
1
218

Recently viewed by you

Why students choose Stuvia

Created by fellow students, verified by reviews

Quality you can trust: written by students who passed their exams and reviewed by others who've used these notes.

Didn't get what you expected? Choose another document

No worries! You can immediately select a different document that better matches what you need.

Pay how you prefer, start learning right away

No subscription, no commitments. Pay the way you're used to via credit card or EFT and download your PDF document instantly.

Student with book image

“Bought, downloaded, and aced it. It really can be that simple.”

Alisha Student

Frequently asked questions