While for-profit companies regularly embark on non-profit activities, the converse issuehas recently come to attention, namely whether non-profit companies may embark onprofit-making activities. This has given rise to a confusing conundrum of practicalimportance, not only in South Africa but also in other jurisdictions. This article discusseswhether non-profit companies, under the South African Companies Act of 2008, mayhave purely commercial objects. It also addresses the intertwined question of the contoursof permissible profit-making activities. Since the non-profit company is the modernsuccessor to the section 21 company under the previous Companies Act of 1973,this article considers the recent case of Cuninghame v First Ready Development 249, inwhich the Supreme Court of Appeal was faced with the problem of a section 21 companywith a commercial object. The article also explores the administration of rentalpool agreements by non-profit companies, which arose in the Cuninghame case.
展开▼
机译：在营利性公司定期开展非营利性活动的同时，最近引起了人们的关注，即非营利性公司是否可以开展营利性活动。这不仅在南非而且在其他司法管辖区也引起了令人困惑的实际重要性难题。本文讨论了根据2008年《南非公司法》，非营利性公司是否可能具有纯粹的商业目的。它还解决了允许的营利活动轮廓相互交织的问题。由于该非营利性公司是根据1973年以前的《公司法》第21条设立的公司的现代继承人，因此，本文考虑了Cuninghame诉First Ready Development 249案的最新情况，该案最高上诉法院面临该条的问题21个有商业目的的公司。本文还探讨了在Cuninghame案中出现的非营利公司对租赁池协议的管理。
展开▼
