An investor in the company demanded that the company manager repay his investment therein as a shareholder. The question that arose was whether the plaintiff is entitled to a refund of his investment as a shareholder in the Company and to compensation for the cessation of the activity of the venture in which he invested? The court held that, in principle, there is no impediment to imposing a duty of conceptual caution on a company manager, and sometimes even on a controlling shareholder, towards an ordinary shareholder therein. For this purpose, the plaintiff had to prove the causal connection between the breach of duty and the alleged damage. As such, the court held that although the issue in question is of a personal nature, it is in essence a claim by the company supplier (in the case of a shareholder) for damage caused to him and loss of income. However, with regard to the loss of his investment in the Company and his claim for the return of the investment, the Court determined that a business investment, like any other investment, carries risks and prospects. In such a case, the secondary loss of the investment and the decline in the value of the Company, and in respect of these components, the plaintiff would have to turn to a derivative claim or another procedure in which the company will sue directly in a manner that will be required to act in favor of its minority shareholders.
Published in Afik News 119 06.02.2013
Related articles
An agent’s actions and agreements outside the scope of actual or apparent authority do not bind the principal
Copyright, Trademarks Media and Artists
Dispute Resolution
A non-Israeli company, which holds the rights to an international brand, claimed that Israeli companies breached a license agreement and infringed upon its trademark by manufacturing and marketing products bearing the brand without its authorization. The Israeli companies argued that they had acted lawfully under explicit authorization received from the company’s exclusive local representative in […]
Approval of CEO compensation via over-ruling requires addressing shareholders’ opposition
Capital Markets and Stock Exchange Regulations
Dispute Resolution
Business, Corporate and Joint Ventures
After the general assembly of shareholders in a public company rejected the decision of the compensation committee and the board of directors of the company to grant the CEO a special bonus that deviates from the company’s compensation policy, the bonus was approved via an “overruling” decision. The Court dismissed the company’s motion for summary […]
Late payments for purchasing a property do not constitute a justification for a delay in its delivery
Real estate in Israel and around the world
Dispute Resolution
A shop purchased from a contractor was delivered with a delay of nearly three years from the contractual date, during most of which the contractor used the shop to store its own construction equipment. At the time of the late delivery, the purchaser signed a delivery protocol. Additionally, during the contract period, the purchaser was […]
An employer may revoke severance pay and advance notice pay from an employee dismissed for a severe disciplinary violation and breach of fiduciary duty
Labor Law
Dispute Resolution
A sales agent worked for over a decade at a sports apparel and equipment marketing company. He was dismissed after being recorded taking merchandise from the warehouse without permission, and after it was discovered that while employed by the company, he sold products and cooperated with a competing company. The Court found that the employee’s […]