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
Imposing on a shareholder of personally liability towards apartment purchasers for late delivery of apartments will only be done in exceptional cases
Business, Corporate and Joint Ventures
Real Estate
Dispute Resolution
Apartments purchasers in a TAMA 38 project in Herzliya, received possession of the apartments over two years late. The purchasers moved to receive their statutory compensation from the shareholder in the entrepreneurial company by virtue of piercing the corporate veil and due personal liability as an officer, as the entrepreneurial company had no other activity […]
A prenup does not negate a common-law status if the souses were in fact in common-law relationship
Common-Law Marriages Agreements
Notarial Services
Dispute Resolution
A pension fund refused to pay a survivors pension to a common law-spouse of a deceased woman, because the fund contended that the prenuptial agreement executed between them indicates that they intended to get married. The Court accepted the claim for survivors pension despite the prenuptial agreement signed. The rights and obligations regarding a pension […]
The same pair of words in a company name may be deemed passing off even if the company names are not exactly the same
Business, Corporate and Joint Ventures
Privacy, GDPR, Confidentiality and protection of reputation
Dispute Resolution
A company that deals in urban renewal included the words “Europe Israel” in its name, similar to another company that deals in the same field, and which CEO moved to the first company. The second company contended to a tort of passing off intended to ride on its reputation. The Court accepted the claim. Passing […]
A publisher of defamation may be required to correct it even if enjoys a defense from claim
Privacy, GDPR, Confidentiality and protection of reputation
Dispute Resolution
After the Nature and Parks Authority confiscated ornamental fish that were marketed without a license as required, the fish farmers published defamatory publications on the Internet against the farm to which the fish were transferred by the Authority, contending that such farm received the permit to keep the fish due to personal relationships with the […]