Corporate case law

Equipos y Controles S.A. s/ concurso preventivo s/ incidente de apelación (National Commercial Court of Appeals, Chamber C, 27/12/2002)

Whether a creditor that was also a competitor should be excluded from the calculation of voting majorities because of a conflict of interest. The Commercial Court of Appeals analyzed insolvency voting not only by reference to the literal statutory exclusions but also in light of the purpose of the proceeding and good faith, in a context involving economic competition.

CNCom., Sala C27/12/2002

Case caption

«Equipos y Controles S.A. s/ concurso preventivo s/ incidente de apelación»

What was at issue

Whether a creditor that was also a competitor should be excluded from the calculation of voting majorities because of a conflict of interest.

What was decided

The Commercial Court of Appeals analyzed insolvency voting not only by reference to the literal statutory exclusions but also in light of the purpose of the proceeding and good faith, in a context involving economic competition.

Extractable criterion

The Commercial Court of Appeals analyzed insolvency voting not only by reference to the literal statutory exclusions but also in light of the purpose of the proceeding and good faith, in a context involving economic competition.
The holding should be read in light of the legal interest protected in the area of exclusion from voting, not solely by reference to the documentary form of the act.
Evidence of the specific facts and of their impact on corporate or creditor rights is decisive when applying the precedent’s doctrine to another case.

Citation: CNCom., Sala C, «Equipos y Controles S.A. s/ concurso preventivo s/ incidente de apelación», 27/12/2002 — Jurisprudencia societaria y comercial

Practical application

It is relevant to hostile creditors, competitors, and conflicts of interest in the formation of creditor majorities.

Frequently asked questions

What is the main takeaway from the case?

Does the rule apply automatically today?

No. The current statutory framework and the specific facts must be verified. Historical precedents retain doctrinal value, but later reforms may alter how they apply.

What should be proven in similar litigation?

The relevant corporate or commercial documentation, the parties’ conduct, the specific harm, and the facts connecting that harm to the central issue in the case: Whether a creditor that was also a competitor should be excluded from the calculation of voting majorities because of a conflict of interest.

Informational commentary on a published ruling; it does not constitute advice nor guarantee an outcome. Application to a case depends on its circumstances.

Do you need advice on this matter?

The firm is headquartered in Buenos Aires, Argentina, and advises clients worldwide.

Contact the firm