A detailed guide on drafting Company Memorandums of Incorporation (MoIs).
Read MoreHome » Building Blocks » Foundation » A Complete Guide to Drafting a Company Memorandum of Incorporation (MoI)
The Memorandum of Incorporation (MoI) effectively serves as the charter for a company, outlining key aspects of its governance and operations. Here are the main points covered in an MoI:
Company type and purpose: The MoI specifies the type of company (e.g., private, public, non-profit).
Capital structure: It details the company’s capital structure, including the types of shares and the number of shares that can be issued.
Shareholder rights: The document outlines the rights, duties, and responsibilities of shareholders.
Directors: It specifies the composition, powers, and functioning of the board of directors.
Meetings: The MoI includes rules and procedures for shareholder and director meetings.
The MoI is filed with the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission (CIPC) in South Africa and is a public document.
Section 19 (1) (b) (i) of the Companies Act, 2008, stipulates that a Company has all the legal powers and capacity of an individual, but with the caveat that these powers can be limited or constrained by the provisions laid out in the company’s Memorandum of Incorporation (MoI).
Here’s a practical example where the MoI needs to include provisions limiting the powers and capacity of the Company:
Imagine a company, EcoTech Innovations (Pty) Ltd, that specializes in developing eco-friendly technologies. Its primary business involves researching and creating sustainable energy solutions. The investors looking to invest in EcoTech Innovations (Pty) Ltd require that the MoI includes a clause that limits the company’s ability to invest in or start projects related to fossil fuel extraction and processing.
The default position under the Companies Act, 2008, determines that an amendment to the MoI can be proposed either by the company’s board or by shareholders who hold at least 10% of the voting rights. Section 16. (2) provides that the MoI may provide different requirements with respect to proposals for amendments.
If a company wants to make it easier for shareholders to propose amendments (e.g., by lowering the threshold from 10% of voting rights to 5%), this can promote greater shareholder involvement and ensure that minority voices are heard.
On the other hand, a company might increase the threshold for proposing amendments to ensure that only significant and well-considered changes are brought forward.
Among its many functions, the MoI specifies the company’s approach to financial management and accountability, particularly in terms of auditing requirements and compliance with the Companies Act, 2008. These provisions in the MoI must be tailored to each company’s specific needs and circumstances, considering factors such as the size of the company, the nature of its business, and its ownership structure.
Auditing Requirements:
The MoI must specify whether the company’s financial statements need to be audited.
Compliance with enhanced accountability requirements:
The MoI must provide if the Company elects to comply with the enhanced accountability requirements as set out in Chapter 3 of the Companies Act, 2008. These requirements relate to the appointment of a Company secretary, appointment of an auditor and the establishment of an audit committee.
Chapter 5, Parts B and C
The MoI also needs to stipulated if Chapter 5, parts B and C are applicable or not. These chapters relate to the Takeover Regulation Panel as well as regulated transactions and offers.
The decision on these matters should be based on the company’s individual characteristics:
For a small, owner-managed company, the need for an audit might not be as stringent, considering the lower risk of financial mismanagement due to the close involvement of the owner. Similarly, such a company might not require strict adherence to the enhanced accountability requirements of Chapter 3 or Parts B and C of Chapter 5, as these can be overly burdensome for small enterprises.
In contrast, a larger company with numerous shareholders, significant turnover, and a complex operational structure would likely require a mandatory audit to ensure financial transparency and accuracy. Compliance with the enhanced accountability requirements becomes more critical to safeguard the interests of various stakeholders and ensure regulatory compliance.
Section 15(3) of the Companies Act, 2008, in South Africa, empowers the board of directors of a company to make, amend, or repeal rules relating to the company’s governance on matters not specifically addressed by the Act or the company’s Memorandum of Incorporation (MoI).
This provision grants the board considerable flexibility in managing and governing the company. However, the MoI can modify this default position, either expanding, restricting, or specifying the board’s rule-making powers. Amending the default position might be necessary or advantageous in situations where the Company is a large or complex company with many shareholders or diverse business operations. In the aforementioned situation, shareholders might prefer to have more direct oversight or input into the rule-making process. The MoI could be amended to require shareholder approval for certain types of rules or to limit the scope of the board’s rule-making authority, ensuring that major governance decisions reflect the wider interests of the shareholders.
The Memorandum of Incorporation (MoI) of a company plays a critical role in defining its capital structure, particularly regarding its shares. According to Section 36 of the Companies Act, 2008, the MoI must specify the classes of shares and the number of shares of each class that the company is authorised to issue. Understanding the difference between authorised and issued shares and the specific rights and limitations attached to each class of shares is is important.
Authorised shares: These are the maximum number of shares that a company is allowed to issue, as stipulated in its MoI. It represents the total share capital that the company can potentially issue to shareholders.
Issued shares: These are the shares that have actually been issued to shareholders. The number of issued shares can be less than or equal to the number of authorised shares but cannot exceed it.
When defining classes of shares, the MoI must address the following key aspects:
Voting rights: The MoI should specify the voting rights attached to each class of shares. Some shares might have full voting rights, while others could have limited or no voting rights. For example, ordinary shares typically carry one vote per share, whereas preference shares might have no voting rights.
Dividend rights: The MoI should detail the rights of shareholders to receive dividends. This includes the right to receive preference dividends, where applicable. Preference shares often have a fixed dividend rate and are typically paid dividends before ordinary shareholders.
Liquidation rights: The MoI should state the rights of shareholders to receive a proportion of the company’s residual value upon liquidation. Preference shares might have priority over ordinary shares in the distribution of residual assets.
Additional provisions can be tailored to each class of shares to meet specific company needs or investment strategies:
Redemption rights: Some shares might be redeemable at the option of either the company or the shareholder, often at a predetermined price.
Conversion rights: Shares might have the option to be converted into another class of shares under certain conditions.
Anti-dilution provisions: These provisions protect shareholders from dilution in case the company issues more shares in the future.
Technology startup: A tech startup might issue two classes of shares: class a ordinary shares with full voting rights for the founders and venture capitalists, and class b preference shares with a fixed dividend rate but no voting rights for angel investors. This structure allows founders and major investors to retain control over company decisions while providing angel investors with priority in dividends.
Family-owned business: In a family-owned business, the family members might hold class a ordinary shares with voting rights, while external investors are issued preference shares with no voting rights but with a fixed dividend rate. This setup enables the family to maintain control over the business while offering attractive returns to external investors.
In conclusion, the provisions in the MoI regarding shares must be carefully structured to balance the control, income, and liquidation preferences of different shareholders, aligning with the company’s strategic objectives and investor expectations.
Section 36(1)(c) of the Companies Act, 2008, introduces a provision for “unclassified shares” in a company’s Memorandum of Incorporation (MoI). This provision allows for a degree of flexibility. Here’s an explanation of how this works and its implications:
The MoI may authorize a certain number of shares without classifying them into specific a specific class. These unclassified shares can later be classified into different classes (e.g., Class F, Class G, etc.) by the board of directors as and when the need arises. This allows the company to respond to changing financial needs, investment opportunities, or strategic directions without having to amend the MoI each time.
While these shares are initially unclassified, the MoI must already outline the preferences, rights, limitations, and other terms associated with these shares. This pre-determination is crucial for legal and operational clarity and ensures that the board’s classification of these shares at a later stage is not arbitrary but follows the MoI.
Section 36(1)(d) of the Companies Act, 2008, introduces an interesting aspect of share classification in a company’s Memorandum of Incorporation (MoI). This provision allows a company to define a class of shares without specifying the associated preferences, rights, limitations, or other terms. Instead, it empowers the board of directors to determine these aspects at a later stage. This approach offers significant flexibility for the company’s capital management and strategic planning.
The MoI can establish a class of shares (like Class C) but leave the specifics of these shares (such as voting rights, dividend preferences, etc.) to be determined by the board at a future date.
This flexibility is particularly valuable in allowing a company to respond rapidly to changing market conditions, investment opportunities, or strategic needs. For example, if the company needs to raise capital quickly or wants to attract a specific type of investor, the board can tailor the rights and preferences of these shares to suit the situation.
The provisions in Section 43 of the Companies Act, 2008, outlines the framework for the issuance and management of debt instruments by companies. These provisions, in conjunction with the company’s Memorandum of Incorporation (MoI), govern how a company can issue debt instruments, the nature of these instruments, and any special privileges they may confer.
As per Section 43(1)(a), a debt instrument includes any security other than shares of a company. This can include bonds, debentures, or other forms of debt securities. However, it does not include simple promissory notes or loans.
Section 43(1)(b) defines a “security document” as any document that embodies the terms and conditions of a debt instrument, such as a trust deed or certificate.
Section 43(2)(a) states that the company’s board may authorize the issuance of secured or unsecured debt instruments, unless restricted by the company’s MoI. This gives the board considerable flexibility in deciding how and when to raise debt.
The board must determine whether each debt instrument issued is secured (backed by the company’s assets) or unsecured.
Under Section 43(3), except as limited by the MoI, a debt instrument may grant its holders special privileges. These can include rights to attend and vote at general meetings, influence the appointment of directors, or involve the allotment or substitution of securities.
The MoI can play a significant role in shaping a company’s approach to debt instruments and can:
Section 36(3) of the Companies Act, 2008, grants the board of a company significant flexibility in managing the company’s share capital. It allows the board to increase or decrease the number of authorized shares, reclassify unissued classified shares, classify unissued unclassified shares, and determine the terms of shares in a class that was previously undefined in terms of preferences, rights, limitations, or other terms. However, the company’s Memorandum of Incorporation (MoI) can modify or limit these powers, potentially giving shareholders more oversight in these decisions.
In situations where shareholders seek additional control or oversight over the company’s share capital, the MoI can be drafted or amended to require shareholder approval for actions contemplated in Section 36(3).
Section 56 of the Companies Act, 2008, addresses the concept of holding securities (such as shares) in a company on behalf of another person, who is the beneficial owner of those securities. While the default provision allows one person (the registered holder) to hold securities for the beneficial interest of another (the beneficial owner), a company’s Memorandum of Incorporation (MoI) can restrict or modify this arrangement. There are several situations where a company might want to include such restrictions in its MoI:
A company might restrict the practice of holding shares on behalf of others to ensure transparency in ownership. This can be particularly important for companies in industries that are heavily regulated or prone to scrutiny, where knowing the actual owners of significant shareholdings is crucial for compliance and governance.
In companies where shareholder simplicity is a priority, restricting the ability to hold shares on behalf of others can prevent the creation of complex and opaque shareholder structures. This can simplify governance and make it easier to manage shareholder relations and communications.
A company might want to ensure that voting rights are exercised directly by those with an economic interest in the company. Restricting shares held on behalf of others can align voting power more closely with economic stakes in the company.
Companies may also restrict this practice as a measure against potential financial crimes. By ensuring shares are registered in the name of the actual owners, companies can reduce the risk of being implicated in money laundering or fraudulent activities.
Sections 57(2) and 57(4) of the Companies Act, 2008, provides that where there is only a single shareholder or where the directors and the shareholders are the same, certain formalities relating to decision making does not have to be adhered to. These provisions offer flexibility in corporate governance but can be tailored through the company’s Memorandum of Incorporation (MoI) to suit specific company needs, for example –
In companies where all shareholders are also directors, the MoI might set rules to maintain a clear distinction between their roles and responsibilities, ensuring that decisions are made with appropriate deliberation and oversight.
Section 61(3) of the Companies Act, 2008, stipulates that the board of a company, or another designated person in the MoI or company rules, must call a shareholders’ meeting if the following conditions are met:
There must be one or more written and signed demands for the meeting delivered to the company, and each demand must describe the same purpose for which the meeting is proposed; and
The demands must represent, in aggregate, at least 10% of the voting rights entitled to be exercised regarding the matter to be considered at the meeting.
Section 61(4) of the Companies Act, 2008, allows a company’s MoI to specify a lower percentage than the 10% threshold for demanding a shareholders’ meeting.
In companies where there is a desire to promote greater shareholder engagement and involvement in company affairs, you may consider lowering the threshold to make it easier for minority shareholders to call meetings. This can be particularly relevant in companies with a large number of shareholders where accumulating 10% of the voting rights might be challenging.
Section 61(9) of the Companies Act, 2008, addresses the location of shareholders’ meetings for a company. This provision grants the board of a company significant flexibility in determining where to hold these meetings, including the option to have them outside the Republic of South Africa. However, the company’s Memorandum of Incorporation (MoI) can alter this default provision.
Generally, if most shareholders are based in South Africa, you may consider providing in the MoI that meetings should be held within the country to ensure that shareholders can easily attend. This is particularly relevant for companies with a large base of shareholders who may not have the means or ability to travel internationally.
For a company with significant operations or a large shareholder base outside South Africa, you may want to consider providing in the MoI that meetings will be held in locations where the company has substantial business interests, facilitating easier participation for international shareholders.
Section 62 (1) of the Companies Act, 2008, sets out the requirements for the minimum notice periods that a company must adhere to when calling a shareholders meeting. The Company’s MoI can, however, change this notice period.
If a company has a large, diverse shareholder base, possibly including international shareholders, you may consider extending the notice period in the MoI to allow shareholders more time to arrange their participation.
Conversely, in fast-paced industries or in situations where quick decision-making is crucial (like in a crisis), you may consider reducing the notice period to ensure agility and timely responses to emerging challenges or opportunities.
Section 66 of the Companies Act, 2008, outlines the governance structure regarding the management and administration of companies in South Africa, specifying the role and composition of the board of directors. This section establishes the foundation for how companies are directed and controlled, giving the board broad authority while allowing for specific modifications through the company’s Memorandum of Incorporation (MoI). Here’s a breakdown of the key provisions and how the MoI can amend these aspects:
Board authority and management:
Minimum number of directors:
MoI specification of director numbers:
Director appointment and removal:
Committees:
Increasing the Minimum Number of Directors:
Direct appointment and removal of directors:
Ex officio directors:
Alternate directors:
Election process:
Committees:
Section 73 of the Companies Act, 2008, outlines various provisions related to the conduct of board meetings. The Memorandum of Incorporation (MoI) of a company plays a significant role in allowing customization of these default provisions to better suit the specific governance practices and needs of the company. Here’s where the MoI can change the default position relating to director meetings:
By modifying these default provisions, a company can tailor its governance practices to align with its operational needs, shareholder expectations, and strategic goals. For instance, a company with a small board might lower the threshold for calling meetings to ensure agility in decision-making, while a company with a diverse or international board might implement stricter notice and participation requirements to accommodate the logistical challenges of assembling directors.
Section 72 of the Companies Act, 2008, provides for the establishment of committees by the board of a company, delegation of board authority to these committees, and the composition and powers of such committees. The Memorandum of Incorporation (MoI) of a company has the flexibility to modify these default provisions to better align with the company’s specific governance framework and operational needs. Here’s how the MoI can change the default positions:
By tailoring these aspects of committee governance, a company can ensure that its committees are structured and operate in a manner that supports effective decision-making, risk management, and strategic oversight. For instance, a company operating in a highly regulated industry might restrict committee membership to individuals with specific regulatory expertise or require that all committee actions related to compliance receive final board approval.
A detailed guide on drafting Company Memorandums of Incorporation (MoIs).
Read MoreRead now! In this article, Derick, tasked with drafting the...
Read MoreDrafting a Shareholders Agreement: The fundamentals (part 1) Read now!...
Read MoreDrafting an MOIA guide to the provisions relating to Directors...
Read MoreMaster Contracts, elevate your career. Join the global movement of shaping the standard of contracts.
South Africa
194 Bancor Avenue Menlyn, Colab Building, Waterkloof Glen, Pretoria, 0181
United States
Form part of the spearhead movement of shaping the global standard for tech contracts.