The Supreme Court defines the tests for dividend distribution
In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court upheld the District Court’s ruling in a derivative lawsuit and established that the criteria for distributing dividends is limited to an analysis of the financial statements from the previous two years. The Court determined that there is no justification for extending the legal language to incorporate information about anticipated losses that are not reflected in the financial reports. Advocates David Hamo and Keshet Lebel acted on behalf of Dolphin Investments, which holds a controlling interest in IDB, in the appeal.
For more details please see:
In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court upheld the District Court’s ruling in a derivative lawsuit and established that the criteria for distributing dividends is limited to an analysis of the financial statements from the previous two years. The Court determined that there is no justification for extending the legal language to incorporate information about anticipated losses that are not reflected in the financial reports. Advocates David Hamo and Keshet Lebel acted on behalf of Dolphin Investments, which holds a controlling interest in IDB, in the appeal.
For more details please see:
29.07.2025
Between a psychologist, a lawyer, and ChatGPT: Should conversations with AI be confidential?
READ MORE
24.07.2025
Petition to the High Court filed by our firm on behalf of Olympic sports associations
READ MORE
11.07.2025
Class Action Motion Against Kal Gav Dismissed – Petitioner Ordered to Pay Costs
READ MORE
11.06.2025
