LETTER: Court action misguided

A failed attempt was made at the 2020 annual general meeting of the Free Market Foundation (FMF) to hijack the organisation. Mike Hull, as a single member, has brought a court application against the FMF claiming its board is illegitimate (“Free Market Foundation is being subverted”, October 25). 

The central basis of Hull’s argument is that the chair of the AGM was replaced by a third party when the election of board members took place. This nullified the election results, he says. His allegations have no merit and are factually wrong. In terms of the FMF constitution its deputy chair presided over the voting that resulted in the election of the current board.

Hull lodged his case 13 months after the 2020 AGM. If genuinely concerned, with the support of only nine other members, he could have requisitioned a special general meeting. He did not. This is a clear indication that it is not the AGM or its outcome that has motivated the court action, but some cause as yet undisclosed by him.

It seems in the light of the failure of his argument in the court papers, Hull wishes now to litigate in public. This is highly irregular. In his letter he raises new issues not covered in his court application. Hull says “invitations to consult ... have gone unanswered”. This incorrect. A new legal rule requires that when issuing summons the party issuing the summons must offer mediation. This was not done by Hull.

When Hull’s attorney mentioned mediation to the FMF’s attorney, we asked for a written proposal. Hull’s attorney said he would need to consult with his client. We have yet to receive a response. Mediation was not proposed by Hull in a letter threatening to interdict the FMF’s August special general meeting at which members voted overwhelmingly in support of proposed amendments to the FMF’s constitution introduced to prevent further attempts at hijacking AGMs.

There is no “small coalition calling itself a ‘camp’”. The FMF had no alternative but to oppose the application, as agreed by a majority of the board at a special board meeting convened to decide the matter. Of course responding to the summons has used money and scarce staff resources; it is the inevitable consequence of Hull issuing a summons against the FMF.

Hull says “the illegitimate board is pushing ahead with an AGM while the matter is before the high court”. The AGM date was set several months before the Hull application. Not only does the FMF’s constitution require the AGM to be held but so does the legislation that governs nonprofit organisations. Hull says “many members will be ineligible to vote”. This is untrue. Every FMF member in good standing is entitled to attend the AGM and to vote.

Hull argues the FMF has become a “closed, elitist, illiberal and politicised club”. Those who read what we write know that we continue to honour our classical liberal values and free-market principles. Those who know about our Khaya Lam (My Home) land reform project and our red tape reduction project, for example, know the term “elitist” to be patent nonsense.

Hull purports to be a friend of the FMF, yet is doing us incalculable harm. We hope members and funders will continue to remember who we are, what we stand for, and how we have always conducted ourselves.

Gail Day
Executive committee chair and executive manager, FMF

JOIN THE DISCUSSION: Send us an email with your comments. Letters of more than 300 words will be edited for length. Send your letter by email to letters@businesslive.co.za. Anonymous correspondence will not be published. Writers should include a daytime telephone number.