Corporate case law

Estación de Servicio Rabaiotti S.R.L. s/ concurso preventivo (National Commercial Court of Appeals, Chamber D, 09/08/2018)

Application of insolvency requirements to an operating company and protection of the business as a going concern during the proceeding. The case illustrates the tension between business preservation and creditor protection, applying the tools of the LCQ without turning continuity of operations into immunity from creditor rights.

CNCom., Sala D09/08/2018

Case caption

«Estación de Servicio Rabaiotti S.R.L. s/ concurso preventivo»

What was at issue

Application of insolvency requirements to an operating company and protection of the business as a going concern during the proceeding.

What was decided

The case illustrates the tension between business preservation and creditor protection, applying the tools of the LCQ without turning continuity of operations into immunity from creditor rights.

Extractable criterion

The case illustrates the tension between business preservation and creditor protection, applying the tools of the LCQ without turning continuity of operations into immunity from creditor rights.
The holding should be read in light of the legal interest protected in the area of reorganization proceedings, 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 D, «Estación de Servicio Rabaiotti S.R.L. s/ concurso preventivo», 09/08/2018 — Jurisprudencia societaria y comercial

Practical application

It is useful for reorganizations of SMEs and operating businesses.

Frequently asked questions

What is the main takeaway from the case?

The case illustrates the tension between business preservation and creditor protection, applying the tools of the LCQ without turning continuity of operations into immunity from creditor rights.

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: Application of insolvency requirements to an operating company and protection of the business as a going concern during the proceeding.

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