مسؤولية مدير الشركة عن مديونياتها في النظام السعودي من المواضيع التي تثير الكثير من التساؤلات خاصة عند الدخول في مرحلة التنفيذ القضائي، فرغم أن الأصل في الشركات ذات المسؤولية المحدودة أن ذمتها مستقلة عن ذمة الشركاء والمديرين إلا أن الممارسات الواقعية أفرزت حالات تتجاوز هذا المبدأ وتستدعي مساءلة المدير شخصيًا بل جنائيًا في بعض الأحيان.
النظام السعودي أرسى ضوابط واضحة لمسؤولية المديرين، فبحسب نظام الشركات المدير لا يُسأل عن ديون الشركة ما لم يثبت أنه خالف عقد التأسيس أو ارتكب خطأ أو إهمالًا في أداء مهماته، وهو ما نصت عليه المادة 32 من النظام، كما أن المادة 165 توسعت في بيان هذا الإطار حين قررت أن المديرين يُسألون بالتضامن عن تعويض الضرر الناتج عن مخالفاتهم لأحكام النظام أو عقد التأسيس أو ما يصدر منهم من أخطاء في عملهم ويُعد هذا الأساس التشريعي لمسؤوليتهم المدنية.
لكن حين ينتقل الأمر إلى محكمة التنفيذ وتطلب من المدير الإفصاح النظامي عن أموال الشركة وموجوداتها ومصادر دخلها وأصولها فإن التهرب أو المماطلة أو حتى التواطؤ في إخفاء الأموال أو تهريبها يُعد خرقًا جسيمًا يتجاوز المسؤولية المدنية إلى المسؤولية الجنائية لا سيما إذا رافقت هذا الفعل نية للإضرار بالدائنين أو التلاعب بحقوق الغير في هذا السياق يُمكن أن تنطبق بعض أحكام نظام مكافحة غسل الأموال خاصة إذا ارتبطت التصرفات بوقائع تستهدف إخفاء الأموال أو عرقلة الإجراءات العدلية، وقد تصل العقوبات في هذه الحالات إلى السجن والغرامة.
المسؤولية تزداد تعقيدًا إذا بلغت خسائر الشركة نصف رأس المال وهنا يلزم المديرين تسجيل هذه الواقعة في السجل التجاري ودعوة الشركاء لاتخاذ قرار حاسم بشأن استمرار الشركة أو حلها خلال مدة لا تتجاوز تسعين يومًا، والإخلال بهذا الواجب النظامي قد يرتب مسؤولية شخصية على المدير تتعلق بالإضرار بمصالح الشركاء أو الغير بحسب ما تقرره المادة ذات العلاقة.
وهنا تبرز أهمية التزام المديرين بالشفافية الكاملة والامتثال الدقيق لأحكام النظام والرجوع الدائم إلى المستشارين القانونيين في كل ما يثير شبهة المسؤولية، كما يتعين عليهم توثيق كل إجراء وقرار يتخذونه باسم الشركة لأن المسؤولية قد تُبنى على مجرد الإهمال أو التراخي في الوفاء بالواجبات المفروضة عليهم.
إن محكمة التنفيذ حين تطلب من مدير الشركة الإفصاح فهي لا تستهدف شخصه وإنما تبحث عن الحقيقة المالية للشركة، لكن إذا ظهر أن المدير يستخدم موقعه لتضليل العدالة أو يتهرب من الإفصاح عن معلومات جوهرية فإن النظام لا يقف مكتوف اليدين بل يُجيز مساءلته وملاحقته وقد يصل الأمر إلى رفع الحماية النظامية عن شخصه واعتباره مسؤولًا مسؤولية مباشرة.
وعليه فإن على كل من يتولى إدارة شركة أن يدرك أن موقعه ليس مجرد صفة إدارية بل مسؤولية نظامية تضعه في دائرة المساءلة متى ما أخل بالواجبات المفروضة عليه سواء بسوء نية أو حتى بإهمال جسيم. هذه الحقيقة ينبغي أن تُفهم بوضوح من جميع العاملين في المجال التجاري، خاصة أن القضاء السعودي أصبح أكثر صرامة في التعامل مع حالات التلاعب المالي والإفصاح الكاذب حرصًا على حماية بيئة الاستثمار وحفظ حقوق المتقاضين.
تابع قناة عكاظ على الواتساب
علي بن طالب بن توزان
The responsibility of a company director for its debts in the Saudi system is a topic that raises many questions, especially when entering the stage of judicial execution. Although the principle for limited liability companies is that their liabilities are independent of those of the partners and directors, real-world practices have produced cases that go beyond this principle and require the personal, and sometimes criminal, accountability of the director.
The Saudi system has established clear controls for the responsibility of directors. According to the Companies Law, a director is not held accountable for the company's debts unless it is proven that they violated the articles of incorporation or committed a mistake or negligence in performing their duties, as stipulated in Article 32 of the law. Article 165 further elaborates on this framework by stating that directors are jointly liable for compensating damages resulting from their violations of the provisions of the law or the articles of incorporation, or any errors they commit in their work, which constitutes the legislative basis for their civil liability.
However, when the matter reaches the execution court and the director is required to disclose the company's assets, resources of income, and properties, evasion, procrastination, or even collusion in concealing or smuggling funds is considered a serious breach that transcends civil liability to criminal liability, especially if this act is accompanied by an intention to harm creditors or manipulate the rights of others. In this context, some provisions of the Anti-Money Laundering Law may apply, especially if the actions are linked to facts aimed at concealing funds or obstructing judicial procedures, and penalties in these cases can reach imprisonment and fines.
The responsibility becomes more complicated if the company's losses reach half of the capital. In this case, directors are required to record this fact in the commercial register and invite the partners to make a decisive decision regarding the continuation or dissolution of the company within a period not exceeding ninety days. Failing to fulfill this statutory duty may result in personal liability for the director related to harming the interests of the partners or others, as determined by the relevant article.
Here, the importance of directors' commitment to full transparency and precise compliance with the provisions of the law becomes evident, along with the need to constantly refer to legal advisors in all matters that raise suspicion of liability. They must also document every action and decision made in the name of the company, as liability may arise from mere negligence or laxity in fulfilling their imposed duties.
When the execution court requests the company director to disclose information, it is not targeting the individual but rather seeking the financial truth of the company. However, if it appears that the director is using their position to mislead justice or evade disclosing essential information, the law does not remain idle; it allows for their accountability and pursuit, which may lead to the removal of legal protection from their person and considering them directly responsible.
Therefore, anyone who manages a company must understand that their position is not merely an administrative title but a statutory responsibility that places them within the scope of accountability whenever they fail to fulfill their imposed duties, whether with bad intent or even through gross negligence. This truth should be clearly understood by all those working in the commercial field, especially since the Saudi judiciary has become stricter in dealing with cases of financial manipulation and false disclosure, in order to protect the investment environment and safeguard the rights of litigants.
The Saudi system has established clear controls for the responsibility of directors. According to the Companies Law, a director is not held accountable for the company's debts unless it is proven that they violated the articles of incorporation or committed a mistake or negligence in performing their duties, as stipulated in Article 32 of the law. Article 165 further elaborates on this framework by stating that directors are jointly liable for compensating damages resulting from their violations of the provisions of the law or the articles of incorporation, or any errors they commit in their work, which constitutes the legislative basis for their civil liability.
However, when the matter reaches the execution court and the director is required to disclose the company's assets, resources of income, and properties, evasion, procrastination, or even collusion in concealing or smuggling funds is considered a serious breach that transcends civil liability to criminal liability, especially if this act is accompanied by an intention to harm creditors or manipulate the rights of others. In this context, some provisions of the Anti-Money Laundering Law may apply, especially if the actions are linked to facts aimed at concealing funds or obstructing judicial procedures, and penalties in these cases can reach imprisonment and fines.
The responsibility becomes more complicated if the company's losses reach half of the capital. In this case, directors are required to record this fact in the commercial register and invite the partners to make a decisive decision regarding the continuation or dissolution of the company within a period not exceeding ninety days. Failing to fulfill this statutory duty may result in personal liability for the director related to harming the interests of the partners or others, as determined by the relevant article.
Here, the importance of directors' commitment to full transparency and precise compliance with the provisions of the law becomes evident, along with the need to constantly refer to legal advisors in all matters that raise suspicion of liability. They must also document every action and decision made in the name of the company, as liability may arise from mere negligence or laxity in fulfilling their imposed duties.
When the execution court requests the company director to disclose information, it is not targeting the individual but rather seeking the financial truth of the company. However, if it appears that the director is using their position to mislead justice or evade disclosing essential information, the law does not remain idle; it allows for their accountability and pursuit, which may lead to the removal of legal protection from their person and considering them directly responsible.
Therefore, anyone who manages a company must understand that their position is not merely an administrative title but a statutory responsibility that places them within the scope of accountability whenever they fail to fulfill their imposed duties, whether with bad intent or even through gross negligence. This truth should be clearly understood by all those working in the commercial field, especially since the Saudi judiciary has become stricter in dealing with cases of financial manipulation and false disclosure, in order to protect the investment environment and safeguard the rights of litigants.


