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
A condominium committee may refuse to approve the transfer of rights to a potential purchaser by virtue of its authority in the bylaws
Real estate in Israel and around the world
Dispute Resolution
The condominium committee of an apartment hotel refused to approve a transfer of rights by virtue of its authority under the condominium bylaws, due to the purchaser’s behavior and an assessment of his unsuitability to the hotel’s rules. The Court rejected the purchaser’s claim and held that the condominium committee acted lawfully according to its […]
Consideration for non-competition will be classified as labor income even in the absence of an employer-employee relationship between the parties
Labor Law
Dispute Resolution
Taxation and Government Incentives and Funding
Purchaser of a company’s operations and assets paid the previous owner and manager of the acquired company for his undertaking to refrain for 3 years from performing activities competing with the acquiring company’s operations. The Court held that this constitutes labor income, as it does not eliminate the recipient’s ability to resume earning a living […]
Revival of a liquidated company requires actual past business activity or a legitimate justification for restoring it to the registry
Business, Corporate and Joint Ventures
Dispute Resolution
A sole shareholder of a company that was voluntarily liquidated after never having engaged in business activity, sought to revive it. The underlying purpose of the proceeding was to utilize the company’s corporate seniority to meet threshold requirements and participate in construction tenders. The Court held that the conditions allowing for the cancellation of a […]
Familial proximity does not by itself rule out the existence of an employment relationship
Labor Law
Dispute Resolution
A lawyer was employed as a salaried employee in a law firm owned by her husband and the National Insurance Institute refused to pay maternity pay contending that she worked as an independent contractor, inter alia, because her salary as an employee significantly exceeded her husband’s profits, no employment contract was signed and no replacement […]