As part of a dispute between shareholders of a private company it was argued that a shareholder who holds half the shares of the company is excluded from the decision making process and is oppressed by taking unreasonable expenses for office holders of the Company at the expense of distribution company’s profits and by harming the legitimate expectations of a shareholder to enjoy the company's profits. The Court held that in a closely held private company there is a legitimate expectations of shareholder to be involved in the management of the Company and there is no impediment to file discrimination claims by a shareholder who holds a 50% stake in the company, as long as the remaining shares are held by a single shareholder who also holds 50% of the Company. The profits of a private company does not lead to an increase in share value and thus avoiding distribution of dividend excludes the shareholder's ability to benefit from them. However, in the absence of a specific stipulation in the articles of the company which requires the distribution of dividends, there is no oppression if the salaries of office holders of the Company do not exceed the market norm and no actions are aimed at distribution of profits in an unequal manner. For this reasoning the claim was dismissed.
Related articles
In a commercial independent contractor agreement, a party does not have the unilateral authority to impose an interim state of unpaid suspension during a dispute
Commercial, Banking and Financial
Labor Law
Dispute Resolution
Natan Zehavi, a Radio Le-Lo Hafsaka broadcaster provided broadcasting services to the radio station as an independent contractor. Following a controversial on-air statement, the station suspended the broadcaster without pay and refused to reinstate him without receiving new financial guarantees on his part. However, the station refrained from formally terminating the agreement, thereby keeping his […]
Depriving the tenant of an option without a real intention to sell the property is an abuse of a contractual right
Real estate in Israel and around the world
Dispute Resolution
Landlords notified the tenants of the termination of the lease and prevented them from exercising an option, contending that they intended to sell the apartment. In practice, the apartment was not sold but was rented to others at higher rents, and the tenants were forced to rent another apartment at a higher price. The Court […]
A party to a joint venture may be obligated to disclose documents and provide accounts even if not a “formal” partnership
Commercial, Banking and Financial
Dispute Resolution
A party to a joint venture demanded an accounting from his partner, claiming entitlement to 20% of the profits. The partner refused to disclose the documents, arguing that no binding agreement had been signed between them. The Court accepted the claim and held that a special relationship existed between the parties, establishing a right to […]
Entitlement to the grant of options is determined in accordance with the conditions set out in the employment agreement and is subject to their fulfillment
Labor Law
Business, Corporate and Joint Ventures
Dispute Resolution
A senior employee who was terminated from a company demanded to receive 20% of its shares, claiming that according to the employment agreement, he is entitled to 5% of the shares of its subsidiary, which was not actually established, because the value of the employing company is four times the value of the subsidiary. The […]