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 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 […]