Corporate case law

Noel, Carlos M. y otra c/ Noel y Cía. S.A. (National Commercial Court of Appeals, Chamber B, 13/06/1991)

The use of a corporate structure in the context of a family dispute and the possibility of piercing the company’s legal personality. The case is a classic on misuse of the corporate form and shows that the analysis cannot end with formal structure: the company’s purpose, the shareholders’ conduct, the corporate interest, and any resulting prejudice to third parties or minority shareholders must all be examined.

CNCom., Sala B13/06/1991

Case caption

«Noel, Carlos M. y otra c/ Noel y Cía. S.A.»

What was at issue

The use of a corporate structure in the context of a family dispute and the possibility of piercing the company’s legal personality.

What was decided

The case is a classic on misuse of the corporate form and shows that the analysis cannot end with formal structure: the company’s purpose, the shareholders’ conduct, the corporate interest, and any resulting prejudice to third parties or minority shareholders must all be examined.

Extractable criterion

The case is a classic on misuse of the corporate form and shows that the analysis cannot end with formal structure: the company’s purpose, the shareholders’ conduct, the corporate interest, and any resulting prejudice to third parties or minority shareholders must all be examined.
The holding should be read in light of the legal interest protected in the area of non-opposability and family corporate groups, 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, «Noel, Carlos M. y otra c/ Noel y Cía. S.A.», 13/06/1991 — Jurisprudencia societaria y comercial

Practical application

It is useful in disputes involving closely held or family companies where the entity is alleged to have been used instrumentally for non-corporate purposes.

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 use of a corporate structure in the context of a family dispute and the possibility of piercing the company’s legal personality.

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