Corporate case law

Incio, Edith R. c/ ML School S.R.L. s/ incidente art. 250 (National Commercial Court of Appeals, Chamber F, 2017)

The requirements for judicial intervention in a company in response to alleged management irregularities. The Commercial Court of Appeals applied the exceptional and subsidiary character of judicial intervention, requiring serious risk and a measure appropriately tailored to the proven danger.

CNCom., Sala F2017

Case caption

«Incio, Edith R. c/ ML School S.R.L. s/ incidente art. 250»

What was at issue

The requirements for judicial intervention in a company in response to alleged management irregularities.

What was decided

The Commercial Court of Appeals applied the exceptional and subsidiary character of judicial intervention, requiring serious risk and a measure appropriately tailored to the proven danger.

Extractable criterion

The Commercial Court of Appeals applied the exceptional and subsidiary character of judicial intervention, requiring serious risk and a measure appropriately tailored to the proven danger.
The holding should be read in light of the legal interest protected in the area of judicial intervention, 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 F, «Incio, Edith R. c/ ML School S.R.L. s/ incidente art. 250», 2017 — Jurisprudencia societaria y comercial

Practical application

It is useful when seeking appointment of an observer, co-administrator, or judicial administrator without exceeding what is necessary.

Frequently asked questions

What is the main takeaway from the case?

The Commercial Court of Appeals applied the exceptional and subsidiary character of judicial intervention, requiring serious risk and a measure appropriately tailored to the proven danger.

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 requirements for judicial intervention in a company in response to alleged management irregularities.

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