Transport, Energy & Revolving Synergy

The final Law Update of 2022 is here, and it’s packed full of articles. The double edition features two focus areas, first is a spotlight on Energy and Resources and second we feature a collection of articles on Transport and Logistics. The developments occurring in these sectors in the MENA region are unprecedented and our lawyers cover vast themes for you.

The Energy and Resources focus features topics such as diversifying energy resources, solar PV, mining in the Middle East, renewable energy and green hydrogen. From a transport perspective, we draw attention to the Bahrain metro project, discuss the challenges and remedies associated with the repossession of an aircraft, and there is advice on what to consider should a party vary the terms of a shipping contract.

This edition navigates you through updates from across jurisdictions such as, Oman, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iraq, Qatar, and the UAE. Each article is timely and provides insights into legal issues and cases that are affecting these sectors across the region.

Read the full edition

The leading law firm in the Middle East & North Africa region.

Law Firm
/
Insights
/
Law Update
/
May 2012
/
Qatar Court of Cassation Judgment- liability of managers in a Qatari limited liability company

Qatar Court of Cassation Judgment- liability of managers in a Qatari limited liability company

Ahmed El Amoury - Senior Associate - Litigation / Employment and Incentives / Legislative Drafting / Insurance

a.amoury@tamimi.com

Doha

Background

The Claimant entered into a murabaha agreement with a limited liability company (LLC). A dispute arose from the said agreement and the Claimant commenced court proceedings against the LLC and its manager alleging that the LLC conducted illegal activities. The Claimant sought an order from the Court requesting that the LLC and the manager jointly and severally repay the Claimant’s monies.

The Court of First Instance and, on appeal, the Court of Appeal held in favour of the Claimant and ordered the LLC and the manager jointly to repay the Claimant’s monies. The manager and the LLC filed a further appeal with the Court of Cassation arguing that a manager cannot be liable for the contractual obligations of a company.

The Court of Cassation decision:

The Court of Cassation disallowed the appeal and decided the following:

The provisions of the Articles 226 and 240 of Commercial Companies Law (Numbered 5 of 2002) stipulate that a manager of a limited liability company shall have full authority and power to manage and bind the company insofar as the company’s constitution does not limit his power.
A manager shall not be personally liable for any obligations resulting from the management of the company, with the exception of what is required for the protection of third parties dealing with a limited liability company. The law provides that the name of the company should be accompanied by the words “company with limited liability” in all the company’s letters, correspondence and contracts. If the managers fail to abide by this requirement, they will be held personally and jointly liable for the liabilities of the company.
Both judgments of the Court of First Instance and the Court of Appeal found that the LLC had entered into a murabaha agreement and the manager had not added the phrase “with limited liability” to the company name, the Court of Cassation concluded that the appellants were jointly and personally liable for the obligations of the company based on the aforesaid provisions of the Commercial Companies Law.

Comment on the judgment

Notwithstanding that it may be a simple task to ascertain whether or not an entity is a company with limited liability, the failure of managers of such company to make it clear to all persons that the company they are dealing with is a limited liability can shift liability to such managers personally.