Corporate case law

Ferrari, Vasco c/ Arlington S.A. (National Commercial Court of Appeals, date not stated in the consulted reporter)

Whether liability could reach beyond the entity where the company functioned as an instrument of abusive conduct. The case is cited within the line of authority permitting exceptional disregard of legal personality where an instrumental use of the entity incompatible with good faith and the corporate purpose is proven.

CNCom.None

Case caption

«Ferrari, Vasco c/ Arlington S.A.»

What was at issue

Whether liability could reach beyond the entity where the company functioned as an instrument of abusive conduct.

What was decided

The case is cited within the line of authority permitting exceptional disregard of legal personality where an instrumental use of the entity incompatible with good faith and the corporate purpose is proven.

Extractable criterion

The case is cited within the line of authority permitting exceptional disregard of legal personality where an instrumental use of the entity incompatible with good faith and the corporate purpose is proven.
The holding should be read in light of the legal interest protected in the area of non-opposability of legal personality, 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., «Ferrari, Vasco c/ Arlington S.A.» — Jurisprudencia societaria y comercial

Practical application

It is useful for distinguishing ordinary corporate control from genuinely abusive instrumentalization of the entity.

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 liability could reach beyond the entity where the company functioned as an instrument of abusive conduct.

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