A director and a controlling shareholder of the company filed a claim asking the court to recognize him as an employee of the company and to grant him all the rights to which he is entitled to as an employee, for the services he provided to the company as a director. The court held that in order to determine the nature of the relations between the parties and to determine whether labor relations existed between them, it is not sufficient to determine the agreements between the parties. Also, a director acting only as part of his position on the board, and even if he receives any compensation for that service, is not considered as an employee of the company. Since in this case the director failed to prove by the combined test that there are indicators that he is an employee of the company (since this was not his only job, since he did not have an office in the company, and many other indicators), the court rejected the claim.
Published in Afik News 231 24.05.2017
Related articles
A machine cannot be considered an ‘inventor’ under the Israeli Patent Law because it is not a human being
Copyright, Trademarks Media and Artists
Dispute Resolution
A patent application was filed as part of an international project aimed at formulating policies for granting intellectual property rights to inventions created by artificial intelligence. The application stated that the applicant for the registration of the invention is the representative of the inventor, an artificial intelligence (AI) machine, which generated the inventions autonomously and […]
The Hours of Work and Rest Law will not apply when it is not possible to separate the working hours from the employee’s private time
Labor Law
Dispute Resolution
Workers on the farm lived there with their families and worked day and night at varying hours according to the needs of the farm. The Labor Court held that the Hours of Work and Rest Law does not apply to the employment the workers due to employer’s inability to supervise. The Israeli Hours of Work […]
When ESOP are subject to terms to be agreed one cannot invalidate an employment agreement because of disappointment of the offered option terms
Business, Corporate and Joint Ventures
High-Tech and Technology
Labor Law
A startup company employed a scientist. The employment agreement stipulated that intellectual property belonged to the company and that the issue of employee stock options would be settled later. After 8 months, a dispute arose regarding the option terms (the company’s requirement for a vesting period and actual work), the scientist decided to go on […]
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 […]