• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

The Defence of the Corporate Veil - Parent Companies Beware!

Extracts from this document...


��ࡱ�>�� /1����.�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������5@ ��0�bjbj�2�2 (*�X�X��������������������8� ���v\^^^^^^$SR�������***��\*\**<��< ���]!���<\�0�<� � <������� �< *��*The Defence of the Corporate Veil - Parent Companies Beware! Much interest has recently been shown in the potential consequences of the judgment given in Stocznia Gdanska SA -v- Latvian Shipping Co and others, which was substantially upheld by the Court of Appeal on 21 June 2002. Although the case related to Shipbuilding Contracts, the result has reinforced the traditional view that the Courts will not countenance any further erosion of the fundamental principle of English Company Law that a company is to be regarded as a legal entity with a separate legal personality, distinct from that of its members. However, the case has highlighted potential alternative sources of liability for parent companies establishing wholly owned single-purpose subsidiaries - in many industry sectors, including shipping, property and big-ticket asset finance. The basic principles The principle of separate corporate personality has been established for over a century. In the leading case of Salomon -v- Salomon & Co. ...read more.


The mere fact that one company is the subsidiary of another (even a wholly-owned subsidiary) is not of itself sufficient to make that subsidiary an agent of its holding company. However, it should be borne in mind that:- - for the purposes of liability to U.K. taxation, the U.K. Tax Authorities will in certain circumstances seek to impose liability on a parent company on the basis that it is carrying on business in the U.K. through a subsidiary acting as its agent or constituting a �permanent establishment�1 within the meaning of the relevant Double Tax Treaty; - directors of a company can be held personally liable in certain circumstances if it can be established that there has been �fraudulent trading� 1 and/or �wrongful trading� 1 under Sections 213 and/or 214, Insolvency Act 1986; - a parent company can in certain circumstances be categorised as a �shadow director� 1 of its subsidiary if the board of directors of the subsidiary is not free, and seen to be free, to come to its own decisions as to the conduct of the subsidiary�s affairs. ...read more.


This document was downloaded from Coursework.Info - The UK's Coursework Database - http://www.coursework.info/ ��IJ��-.������������������h� �h� �OJQJh� �h� �CJOJQJ%h� �h� �OJQJfHq� ����)h� �h� �CJOJQJfHq� ����h� �h�_s h�_sh� �>U V k l fg~��\]��������#$mn�������������������������������gd�_s�����EFxy����JKLM����./01������������������������������$a$gd� �$a$gd� �gd�_s��������������gd�_s$a$gd� �&1�h:p�_s��/ ��=!�'"�'#��$��%��D@�D NormalCJ_H aJmH nHsH tHDA@�D Default Paragraph FontRi�R Table Normal�4� l4�a� (k�(No ListDZ@�D �_s Plain TextCJOJQJ^JaJ4@4 � �Header ���!4 @4 � �Footer ���!`�o"` � �watermark header$a$CJOJQJfHq� ����N�o2N � �watermark footer$a$ CJOJQJ�*����r�V�:����������alex��_s� ��@�����`@��Unknown������������G��z ��Times New Roman5V��Symbol3&� �z ��Arial7&� � �VerdanaG5�� �����h�MS Mincho-�3� fg?5� �z ��Courier New"1���hP�&P�&P�&O�\O�\\�������4��2�� H�?�������������������_s��;The Defence of the Corporate Veil - Parent Companies BewareTCoursework.Info Coursework - http://www.coursework.info/ - Redistribution ProhibitedTCoursework.Info Coursework - http://www.coursework.info/ - Redistribution Prohibitedalexalex�� ��Oh��+'��0����DT�� , H T ` lx����<The Defence of the Corporate Veil - Parent Companies BewareUCoursework.Info Coursework - http://www.coursework.info/ - Redistribution ProhibitedualexewoUCoursework.Info Coursework - http://www.coursework.info/ - Redistribution Prohibitedu>Downloaded from Coursework.Info - http://www.coursework.info/is Normal.dotfalexl.d2exMicrosoft Word 10.0@@�AP!��@�AP!��@�AP!��O��� ��Õ.��+,��D��Õ.��+,���X���H����� ���� � 8�UCoursework.Info Coursework - http://www.coursework.info/ - Redistribution ProhibitedaUCoursework.Info Coursework - http://www.coursework.info/ - Redistribution ProhibitedaUCoursework.Info Coursework - http://www.coursework.info/ - Redistribution Prohibiteda\�A <The Defence of the Corporate Veil - Parent Companies Beware Titled@���+K_PID_LINKBASE CopyrightDownloaded FromCan RedistributeOwner�A4http://www.coursework.comcoursework.comehttp://www.coursework.comeiNo, do not redistributecoursework.com/ �������� !"#$%����'()*+,-��������0��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������Root Entry�������� �F'�]!��2�1Table��������WordDocument��������(*SummaryInformation(����DocumentSummaryInformation8������������&CompObj������������j������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ ���� �FMicrosoft Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.8�9�q ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Machinery of Justice section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Machinery of Justice essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Corporate Separate Personality

    3 star(s)

    His relationship was only one with the company and it was irrelevant he had no 'legal or equitable' interest with the assets.

  2. Law and Fault. The fundamental principle of English law is that there is ...

    In spite of this, fault liability requires some intention, or a minimum of conscious failure to take care by the defendant. In contrast, for strict liability the law does not enquire into fault, the defendant is found guilty purely on actus reus.

  1. Court Structure

    The court has the following jurisdiction: a. To hear appeals against conviction of indictable offences. b. To hear appeals against sentence from the Crown Court. c. To hear cases referred to it by the Criminal Cases Review Commission. d. To hear appeals against a verdict of "not guilty by reason of insanity" or findings of unfitness to plead.

  2. Describe with the aid of examples, the authorities, representative bodies or persons that exercise ...

    The company itself, as a distinct legal person from its members, can never be entitled to any part of the proceeds. Upon completion of the winding up, the company is struck off the Register. Where the Court has made a winding up order, a statement of the company's affairs must,

  1. Law - Piercing the corporate veil

    Why should the courts "pierce the corporate veil"? For justice? A disputing case was Creasy v Breachwood Motors Ltd2. In that case, Creasy was wrongly dismissed from his employment as the general manager of the Welwyn Motors Ltd and was awarded a damage of more than �60,000.

  2. Microsoft Antitrust Case Microsoft is a large diversified computer software manufacturer. Microsoft produces ...

    on May 12, 1998. On June 23, 1998 the Court of Appeals ruled that the 1995 consent decreed did not apply to Windows 98. The reason given for this ruling was that Windows 98 was shipped with an integrated Internet Explorer as part of the operating system and an Internet

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work