A supplier of a company demanded that a shareholder of a company, who was also in practice its CFO, be required to personally pay the company debts for goods supplied, after presenting him with presentations that the company cash flow difficulties were easy and not a real financial hardship with an apprehension of non-payment and he continued to issue checks and sign them The Court attributed the company debt to the shareholder personally as he managed the company with thin capitalization and hid its true financial situation from the company creditor. A personal liability of a company shareholder will be imposed in exceptional cases where the special conditions for piercing the corporate veil are met. Managing a company in a state of thin capitalization, which occurs when the company equity or asset inventory is not sufficient to cover the company liabilities, is a prohibited use of the incorporation veil because the shareholder 'enjoys' the company profit prospects, but does not share the risks of loss - which are rolled over to the shoulders of the external creditors. Additionally, an organ of a company is not exempt of personal liability if acted in an undue manner towards third parties. In this case, the shareholder knew that the company debts exceeded the value of its assets but despite this the company continued, with his knowledge, to order goods and issue future checks without cover. In addition, his role in the management of the company included personally signing company checks, and accordingly reviewing its financial conduct, therefore he had a duty of care towards the supplier as part of the general duty of care of a CFO in a company vis-à-vis its creditors who rely on his representations. Therefore, the shareholder is personally liable for the company debts.
Published in Afik News 375 30.11.2022
Related articles
Concealing a history of moisture damage in an apartment constitutes a fundamental breach entitling to liquidated damages and repair costs
Real estate in Israel and around the world
Dispute Resolution
A couple purchased a residential apartment and after receiving possession discovered severe and hidden moisture problems therein. The sellers of the property were aware of a history of flooding, sealing issues and previous proceedings regarding the moisture, but chose not to share this material information at the time of the sale and declared that the […]
A party to a best-efforts contract shall not be liable for third-party delays as long as it acted with reasonable diligence
Commercial, Banking and Financial
Dispute Resolution
Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) demanded that a client pay unpaid debts for helicopter parking and maintenance services. The client contended, inter alia, that it suffered damage due to a delay in the certification of IAI’s technicians, claiming a breach of the agreement. The Court accepted the main claim, rejected the counterclaim and held that the […]
A provision in a will that disinherits a person who challenged the will shall not apply to an heir who challenged it in good faith and on well-founded grounds.
Wills and Estates
Intergenerational Law (Trusts, Estates, Lasting Powers of Attorney, Parenting)
Dispute Resolution
. One of the heirs filed an objection to the probate of the will based on the circumstances of its execution and the manner of the estate’s distribution, while the will had a provision under which an heir who applies to the Court or files an objection to the probate of the will shall be […]
A football player’s claim for cogent rights will be referred to the Football Association’s Arbitration Institute
Labor Law
Dispute Resolution
A professional football player filed a lawsuit in the Labor Court against his former team for the payment of cogent rights, remedies for unlawful dismissal, and contractual rights. The Court held that the proceedings must be stayed and the dispute referred to the Football Association Arbitration Institute. Generally, cogent rights in protective labor law cannot […]