Reopening and appointment obtained
Two applicants represented by Daniel Zahavi obtained a Curaçao court order reopening the liquidation of a dissolved private foundation and appointing the liquidator they had proposed. The court endorsed the application as granted on the grounds stated in it. This was a substantive corporate order authorizing the liquidation to proceed.
The applicants had sought a liquidator to deal with the foundation’s remaining affairs after its dissolution. The order supplied that appointment and the authority to proceed with the reopened liquidation. It was a defined corporate remedy, rather than a damages award or an order transferring assets to the applicants.
A cross-border corporate obstacle
The applicants identified themselves in the petition as the foundation’s ultimate beneficial owners. They explained that the foundation occupied a holding and management role within an international corporate structure, and that its dissolution had disrupted decision-making further down that structure.
The application described practical concerns about corporate approvals, signing documents and maintaining business relationships. Those statements explain why the applicants sought relief; they should not be read as proof that any threatened loss occurred or that every operational difficulty was later resolved.
The application and the court’s approval
Daniel Zahavi submitted the application for both applicants, requesting reopening of the liquidation and appointment of a named liquidator who had agreed to act. The petition identified their interest in the foundation and referred to corporate records and documents supporting the proposed appointment. It also recorded that the Chamber of Commerce had indicated no objection to reopening.
The signed judicial endorsement granted the request on the grounds stated in the application. The court accepted the proposed liquidator. This distinguishes the relief actually obtained from a request that is merely filed or left for later determination: both the reopening and the appointment were approved.
The boundaries of the reopening order
Reopening liquidation did not itself restore ordinary operations or undo the dissolution. In separate later proceedings, the court refused the foundation’s request to approve revocation of the dissolution and appoint the liquidator as director, ordering it to pay NAf 1,500 in legal costs. That later refusal did not reverse the reopening order.
The result described here is the successful reopening application and appointment. The reviewed decisions do not establish completion of the liquidation, recovery of funds or resolution of every operational problem in the wider structure. Outcomes depend on their particular facts and documents and do not guarantee a similar result.
Case summaries provide general information. Results depend on the facts, evidence and procedural position of each matter. Past outcomes do not guarantee results.
All notable cases