The inclusion of stakeholders and the Locus Standi of the oppression remedy: a comparative analysis of South Africa and Canada

Abstract

This dissertation assesses the impact of the narrow interpretation and application of the oppression remedy in the South African Companies Act 71 of 2008, s 163 on the inclusion of stakeholders and compares it with the Canadian experience. It reviews the historical development of the oppression remedy in South Africa and focuses on how the interpretation and application of s 163 continues to exclude various stakeholders in the locus standi of the remedy. The comparative exposition of the interpretation and application of the South African and Canadian oppression remedy provided in this dissertation brings out fundamental differences between the two, highlights the need to extend the South African interpretation to include various stakeholders and elaborates on the benefits of a broader approach to the remedy. By outlining the impact and benefits of the inclusion of various stakeholders in the remedy as opposed to their exclusion, the study advocates for a broadened and inclusive interpretation of s 163 by the courts to create a platform for various stakeholders to seek relief through the remedy. Furthermore, to minimize ambiguity in application of the remedy, the dissertation proposes a modification of the interpretation and application of s 163 to explicitly include all stakeholders in the description of oppression remedy building on the Canadian experience through judicial transplantation.