The transfer of activity from one company to the other in order to avoid the return of state grants is a fraud and will personally obligate the shareholders

In the 1990s, a diamond trading company received state grants to encourage export, which under certain conditions were required to be repaid. The company ceased operations at a certain stage and transferred its activity to a newly established sister company and did not repay the grant even though the terms for repayment were met.
The Supreme Court held that the shareholders, in transferring the activity from one company to another, committed a fraud in order to avoid paying royalties to the State and therefore both the new company and the shareholders are personally responsible to the State for the repayment of the grant. The establishment of a new company with the same ownership and with the same activity is of no economic purpose and therefore constitutes an artificial action all of which purpose is a fraud.