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
There is public interest to publish suspicion of wrong doing by a business to its customers, suppliers and employees
Privacy, GDPR, Confidentiality and protection of reputation
Dispute Resolution
A marketer of cosmetics entered into a franchise and sales agreement with a supplier. After the relationship between the parties soured due to allegations of fraud by the parties, the marketer expressed in various forums, including to clients and suppliers of the supplier, offensive statements regarding the conduct of the supplier. The Court held that […]
Contractual liquidated damages that are above 10-15% of the contract value may not be enforced
Commercial, Banking and Financial
Real estate in Israel and around the world
Dispute Resolution
A Seller of rights in a plot (acquired from a receiver) undertook to complete the recording of the rights in his name within 40 days but the recording was affected only after six years. The purchasers demanded the full liquidated damages stipulated in the contract (ILS 150,000), which constituted approximately 28% of the transaction value. […]
A will shall be invalidated in case of involvement and undue influence by the beneficiary
Wills and Estates
Intergenerational Law (Trusts, Estates, Lasting Powers of Attorney, Parenting)
Dispute Resolution
A daughter, who inherited her late mother’s estate together with her sibling, sought to revoke the inheritance order due to a will in which the deceased bequeathed the entire estate to her. The Court dismissed the motion to revoke the inheritance order due to undue influence exerted on the testator. The Israeli Inheritance Law stipulates […]
A municipality may sometimes be obligated to pay a supplier even if no written agreement was signed
Public Law, Elections Law and Tenders
Dispute Resolution
A municipality refused to compensate a supplier for works performed in two projects at the order of the municipality, amounting to approximately ILS 850,000 due to the fact that no formal signed agreement exists, due to an election period and changes in the local administration. The Court partially accepted the claim and ordered the municipality […]