Krympress reports:
There are situations when a citizen, it would seem, just wants to protect his shares or challenge the decision of the general meeting — but does not realize that we are talking about a corporate dispute. And this is a fundamentally important difference. On whether the nature of the dispute is correctly determined, it directly depends on which court to contact — in the arbitration or court of general jurisdiction, and will also be needed Corporate lawyer services. A mistake here does not just slow down the process — it can disrupt the whole thing.
A corporate dispute is a dispute related to the creation, management or participation in the legal entity. We are not talking about conflicts between different companies, but about disagreements within one organization: between founders, shareholders, members of the board of directors, and management. This includes the issues of the election or removal of directors, challenging decisions of the assembly, the requirement to provide information, disputes on the size of shares or right of vote, as well as disputing transactions if they cause damage to the company.
It is important to understand: even if the dispute concerns shares or shares, this does not always automatically make it corporate. For example, if spouses share property, which includes shares in an LLC — this is a family dispute, not corporate. But if the participant of the company disputes the transaction committed by the company, this already falls under Article 225.1 of the agricultural sector and is subject to consideration in the arbitration court.
There is also the opposite situation: the company as a legal entity can dispute the transaction from the counterparty-but this is already a civil dispute, and not a corporate one. The difference is in the subject. In a corporate dispute — this is always a participant whose position is associated with his status in the company.
Why is it important? Because the arbitration court is not just a different building. Here is a different approach to proof, other procedural norms, another practice. Arbitration courts take into account not only formal documents, but also indirect circumstances — business practice, real impact on the company, correspondence, and internal decisions. This is especially manifested when it comes to actual participation in management.
In addition, corporate disputes are regulated by a special procedural order. The statement of claim has its own requirements: it is necessary to indicate which corporate rights are violated, to attach evidence of participation in the company, and sometimes confirming the direction of the claim. There are special rules for imposing interim measures, reconciliation of the parties, as well as responsibility for non -fulfillment of procedural duties.
In practice, such disputes are rarely isolated. Often they are part of a larger corporate conflict that affects the interests of not only shareholders, but also creditors, employees, partners. And the decision in one case rarely puts an end to the entire confrontation.
Errors in determining the jurisdiction are a frequent phenomenon. But the consequences can be serious: both for the parties and for judges. There were cases when the judge of the district court took the claim for tens of millions related to the disputing of the decision of the general meeting — and as a result, his career itself was in jeopardy. The arbitration court canceled the decision, and the judge was deprived of the authority. Such precedents show: the formal approach is inappropriate here.
If you feel that disagreements are associated with your status in the company, with the management or with the rights of the participant — do not postpone the appeal to the lawyer. The right legal nature of the dispute is the first step to its effective resolution.
Crimea news | Krympress: Latest news and main events
Comments are closed.