Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Similarly, in Gencor v Dalby, [33] the tentative suggestion was made that the corporate veil was being lifted where the company was the "alter ego" of the defendant. In truth, as Lord Cooke (1997) has noted extrajudicially, it is because of the separate identity of the company concerned and not despite it that equity intervened in all of these ...
Alter Ego Theory [ edit ] The court stated that to successfully move forward on an alter ego theory to impute liability for Atex's actions to Kodak, the plaintiff would have to show that both that the two companies operated as a "single economic entity" and that there would have to be some unfairness or inequity involved in not piercing the veil.
The domination of the parent company over the subsidiary had to be complete for the parent company to be treated as liable for the debts of the subsidiary. It was needed that the subsidiary be merely the alter ego of the parent, or that the subsidiary be thinly capitalized, so as to perpetrate a fraud on the creditors. Cardozo J said the following.
Corporate liability Lennard's Carrying Co Ltd v Asiatic Petroleum Co Ltd [1915] AC 705 is a famous decision by the House of Lords on the ability to impose liability upon a corporation . The decision expands upon the earlier decision in Salomon v Salomon & Co. [1897] AC 22 and first introduced the " alter ego " theory of corporate liability.
Todd Herman, author of The Alter Ego Effect, is a performance coach to pro athletes, business leaders and public figures—and the mastermind behind late NBA star Kobe Bryant’s famous “Black ...
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 .
A federal appeals court blocked Nasdaq rules to increase boardroom diversity, saying that the Securities and Exchange Commission did not have the authority to approve them.. Wednesday’s ruling ...
Limited partners are subject to the same alter-ego piercing theories as corporate shareholders. However, it is more difficult to pierce the limited partnership veil because limited partnerships do not have many formalities to maintain. So long as the partnership and the members do not co-mingle funds, it would be difficult to pierce the veil. [3]