Corporate case law

Errecart, Susana Luisa c/ La Gran Largada S.A. y otros s/ ordinario (National Commercial Court of Appeals, Chamber B, 05/02/2004)

The regularity of notice, minutes, and the shareholder’s access to the information necessary to exercise corporate rights. The Commercial Court of Appeals addressed the minimum safeguards governing shareholders’ meeting procedure and the importance of prior information as an element of validity and transparency.

CNCom., Sala B05/02/2004

Case caption

«Errecart, Susana Luisa c/ La Gran Largada S.A. y otros s/ ordinario»

What was at issue

The regularity of notice, minutes, and the shareholder’s access to the information necessary to exercise corporate rights.

What was decided

The Commercial Court of Appeals addressed the minimum safeguards governing shareholders’ meeting procedure and the importance of prior information as an element of validity and transparency.

Extractable criterion

The Commercial Court of Appeals addressed the minimum safeguards governing shareholders’ meeting procedure and the importance of prior information as an element of validity and transparency.
The holding should be read in light of the legal interest protected in the area of notice and information rights, 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 B, «Errecart, Susana Luisa c/ La Gran Largada S.A. y otros s/ ordinario», 05/02/2004 — Jurisprudencia societaria y comercial

Practical application

It is useful for reviewing defects in notice, agenda, minutes, and documentation made available before a shareholders’ meeting.

Frequently asked questions

What is the main takeaway from the case?

The Commercial Court of Appeals addressed the minimum safeguards governing shareholders’ meeting procedure and the importance of prior information as an element of validity and transparency.

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: The regularity of notice, minutes, and the shareholder’s access to the information necessary to exercise corporate rights.

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