enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Piercing the corporate veil - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piercing_the_corporate_veil

    Piercing the corporate veil or lifting the corporate veil is a legal decision to treat the rights or duties of a corporation as the rights or liabilities of its shareholders. Usually a corporation is treated as a separate legal person , which is solely responsible for the debts it incurs and the sole beneficiary of the credit it is owed.

  3. Gencor ACP Ltd v Dalby - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gencor_ACP_Ltd_v_Dalby

    Piercing the corporate veil, dishonest assistance Gencor ACP Ltd v Dalby [2000] EWHC 1560 (Ch) is a UK company law case concerning piercing the corporate veil . Facts

  4. Wallersteiner v Moir - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wallersteiner_v_Moir

    Fraud, lifting the veil Wallersteiner v Moir [1974] 1 WLR 991 is a UK company law case concerning piercing the corporate veil . This case was followed by a connected decision, Wallersteiner v Moir (No 2) , [ 1 ] that concerned the principles behind a derivative claim .

  5. Limited liability - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_liability

    Thus, there is not one characteristic that defines the piercing of a corporate veil – a factors test is used to determine if piercing is appropriate or not. [ 13 ] If shares are issued "part-paid," then the shareholders are liable, when a claim is made against the capital of the company, to pay to the company the balance of the face or par ...

  6. Lift the corporate veil - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/?title=Lift_the_corporate_veil&...

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lift_the_corporate_veil&oldid=457548729"

  7. Littlewoods Mail Order Stores Ltd v IRC - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Littlewoods_Mail_Order...

    Littlewoods was complaining that the whole rent of £42,450 was deductible as an expense wholly for the purpose of trade under s 137 Income Tax Act 1952. The Commissioners rejected this. Plowman J held that the rent payments by Littlewoods were of a revenue character and properly deductible, but relying on a case that was soon reversed by the ...

  8. IRS has improved taxpayer services but is slow to resolve ID ...

    www.aol.com/irs-improved-taxpayer-services-slow...

    The IRS boosted taxpayer services through Democrats’ Inflation Reduction Act but still faces processing claims from a coronavirus pandemic-era tax credit program and is slow to resolve certain ...

  9. Perpetual Real Estate Services, Inc. v. Michaelson Properties ...

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_Real_Estate...

    Properties did not have the money, and went bankrupt, so Perpetual sued Aaron to pay. Aaron argued that Properties was a separate legal person, and it was inappropriate to pierce the corporate veil in this circumstance. However, the jury ruled that it could be pierced and that Aaron should pay. [2] Aaron appealed.