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. DHN Food Distributors Ltd v Tower Hamlets LBC - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DHN_Food_Distributors_Ltd...

    lifting the veil DHN Food Distributors Ltd v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council [1976] 1 WLR 852 is a UK company law case where, on the basis that a company should be compensated for loss of its business under a compulsory acquisition order, a group was recognised as a single economic entity .

  6. Kosmopoulos v Constitution Insurance Co of Canada - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosmopoulos_v_Constitution...

    To reach this conclusion the Court examined the requirements to "lift the veil". Wilson J. explained: The law on when a court may disregard this principle by "lifting the corporate veil" and regarding the company as a mere "agent" or a "puppet" of its controlling shareholder or a parent corporation follows no consistent principle.

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

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

    Perpetual paid the judgments on behalf of AAA, then sought Properties. 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.

  8. Walkovszky v. Carlton - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walkovszky_v._Carlton

    Walkovszky v. Carlton, 223 N.E.2d 6 (N.Y. 1966), [1] is a United States corporate law decision on the conditions under which Courts may pierce the corporate veil. A cab company had shielded itself from liability by incorporating each cab as its own corporation. The New York Court of Appeals refused to pierce the veil on account of ...

  9. Gilford Motor Co Ltd v Horne - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilford_Motor_Co_Ltd_v_Horne

    Fraud, lifting the veil Gilford Motor Co Ltd v Horne [1933] Ch 935 is a UK company law case concerning lifting the corporate veil . It gives an example of when courts will treat shareholders and a company as one, in a situation where a company is used as an instrument of fraud.