An escrow agent submitted a motion to the Court to approve the liquidator's wage at a rate higher than that set forth in the regulations, retroactive, after doing their work. The Court held that although the good and complex work, the rule is that the wage of office holders will be terminated in accordance with the regulations. Furthermore, wage regulations should not be bypassed by other mechanisms, and this is even where the position holder has invested a significant effort in managing the process. A higher fee than prescribed in the regulations is for cases in which the position holder conducted a complex procedure of legal action from beginning till end, and the wage mechanism was determined in advance and not retroactively. Therefore, and since the request for high fees came retroactively, and since this proceeding ended in compromise at its beginning, the Court rejected the request.
Published in Afik News 246 20.12.2017
Related articles
One who induces a client to trade in the capital market while presenting false representations in bad faith may be personally liable to compensate them.
Business, Corporate and Joint Ventures
Dispute Resolution
A woman traded in the capital market through an Israeli company. The company representatives acted under fictitious identities, presented themselves as certified advisors, promised false “bonuses,” and applied continuous pressure on her to deposit funds while concealing material risks and without a proper license. As heavy losses accumulated and after she requested to withdraw her […]
It is forbidden to use a company name which may mislead the public that it is another company
Business, Corporate and Joint Ventures
Dispute Resolution
A man founded a company with a name that includes his full name. Thereafter, members of his family founded a company with a name that also includes the shared surname and deals in the same areas of activity. However, after decades of activity and an agreement between the parties that the first company would be […]
A shareholder who is not personally a party to an arbitration agreement will not be added to the arbitration proceeding to which the company is a party
Business, Corporate and Joint Ventures
Dispute Resolution
A controlling shareholder in a company was added as a party to an arbitration proceeding, even though he is not personally a party to the arbitration agreement, but rather the company. The Supreme Court held that there was no reason to add the controlling shareholder to the arbitration proceeding by virtue of piercing the corporate […]
A related party transaction that was not duly approved is valid vis-a-vis a third party if did not know about the defect in the approval process
Business, Corporate and Joint Ventures
Dispute Resolution
A company registered a lien in favor of a third party to secure a debt of its controlling shareholder to the third party. The company did not convene a shareholders’ meeting to approve the transaction even though the director had a personal interest in it, but the company made a representation as if the lien […]