This is the "Elephant". Interestingly, the proxies I carried to Cairo were from multiple African countries and not just from Southern or South Africa. Anyway - that was 7+ years ago now, water under the bridge.
I do feel (and generally agree) though that the proxy limit should be completely removed. It will probably give truer reflections of who's playing what games... I also like proxies that optionally provide instructions to the holder. On 30/09/2016 13:27, Ashok Radhakissoon wrote: > Dear Alan, > I am only replying to you on this as I advise the Board only.It is only > during an AGMM, when called upon, that i intervene. > You are right in stating that the Company's Act takes precedence over > the bylaws. > I recall that after the Cairo election, the Community felt that bringing > a substantial number of proxies especially from a particular region > where AFRINIC membership was dense could not from a "community " > perspective give the best representation for the Africa regions.This is > why the limitation of the number of proxies was introduced and voted by > the community. > This provision of the bylaws would in no way withstand legal challenge > as suggested by Andrew. > Regards > Ashok. > > On 29/09/2016 22:29, Alan Barrett wrote: >>> On 29 Sep 2016, at 22:09, Andrew Alston >>> <andrew.als...@liquidtelecom.com> wrote: >>> >>> I am also far from convinced that the limitation on proxies would >>> stand up to legal scrutiny and I would like to hear informed legal >>> opinion on this. >>> >>> The fifth schedule of the companies act – clause 6, makes specific >>> references to proxies – and is explicit that any member may appoint >>> anyone as a proxy. >> What the Mauritius Companies Act refers to as Members corresponds to >> what the AFRINIC Bylaws refer to as Registered Members. >> >>> It also has a very specific clause in the companies act that states >>> that the entirety of clause 6 applies “not withstanding any provision >>> in any constitution adopted by the company.” The only exception to >>> this is clause 6 (d)(v) which makes reference to the format of the >>> actual proxy. >>> >>> My reading of this – and again, I would like to hear informed legal >>> opinion, is that limitations on the proxy instruments that could >>> impact on anyone appointing a proxy of their choice would be out of >>> line with the companies act – and hence the limitation in our bylaws >>> is illegal and cannot be enforced – since it is overridden by the act >>> – which reigns supreme. >>> >>> Can any lawyers on this list please comment on the above? >> I am not a lawyer, but I would assume that the Companies Act may >> override the Bylaws on matters relating to Directors and Registered >> Members, but not on matters relating to Resource Members (which is an >> AFRINIC construct that is not reflected in the Companies Act). >> >> Alan Barrett >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Community-Discuss mailing list >> Community-Discuss@afrinic.net >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss@afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss -- Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems - (South) Africa m...@posix.co.za Tel: +27.128070590 Cell: +27.826010496 For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss@afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss