Corporate case law

Forns, Eduardo Ángel c/ Uantú S.A. s/ ordinario (National Commercial Court of Appeals, Chamber B, 24/06/2003)

The validity of corporate-body decisions and the potential liability of directors and statutory auditors for acts challenged on the basis of their relationship to the corporate purpose and interest. The Commercial Court of Appeals analyzed the possibility of challenging corporate decisions and seeking liability while distinguishing the functions of the board of directors from those of the statutory audit body.

CNCom., Sala B24/06/2003

Case caption

«Forns, Eduardo Ángel c/ Uantú S.A. s/ ordinario»

What was at issue

The validity of corporate-body decisions and the potential liability of directors and statutory auditors for acts challenged on the basis of their relationship to the corporate purpose and interest.

What was decided

The Commercial Court of Appeals analyzed the possibility of challenging corporate decisions and seeking liability while distinguishing the functions of the board of directors from those of the statutory audit body.

Extractable criterion

The Commercial Court of Appeals analyzed the possibility of challenging corporate decisions and seeking liability while distinguishing the functions of the board of directors from those of the statutory audit body.
The holding should be read in light of the legal interest protected in the area of board of directors, corporate purpose, and statutory audit, 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, «Forns, Eduardo Ángel c/ Uantú S.A. s/ ordinario», 24/06/2003 — Jurisprudencia societaria y comercial

Practical application

It is useful in complex actions combining claims for corporate invalidity with directors’ and statutory auditors’ liability.

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: The validity of corporate-body decisions and the potential liability of directors and statutory auditors for acts challenged on the basis of their relationship to the corporate purpose and 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