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