Solomon Case Study

1997 Words4 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Comparative study of separate legal personality

Separate Legal Personality, Limited Liability and the Corporate Veil
Dignam and Lowry (2016) state that in order to understand the legal personality we need to keep the human being and legal persons separate as humanity is a state of nature while the legal personality is an artificial creation. They further state that legal personality can be given to non humans since humanity is not a requisite for legal personality. Kraakman, Armour, Hansmann state that corporate law allows a company to serve as a single contracting entity different from its owners and managers i.e. the company can own property, enter into contracts, sue and be sued in its own name. Davies and Worthington (2012) sum up by saying that the company is a distinct legal entity …show more content…

Liability of parent companies for the activities of their subsidiaries
Brenda Hannigan (2009) states that in legitimizing the concept of one man Company the Solomon case also legitimizes the group concept i.e. the subsidiary company is not an agent of its parent company and both are separate legal entities and the relationship existing between them is same as the one between Solomon and his company. It is expected for the courts to respect the separate identity of each company in the group by applying the principles of the Solomon case.
David Kershaw (2012) states that a corporate group consisting of parent and subsidiary companies such as Vodafone Plc and Mark and Spencer Plc are often thought of as single unit when in fact they are distinct legal units under law. He states despite the Solomon verdict not saying anything about being limited to companies owned by real persons it is assumed there needs to be no further discussion in with regard to corporate groups. He asks the question that under what circumstances if at all any, is the distinct legal personality of parent and subsidiary companies ignored and they are treated as a single economic …show more content…

Cape Products was a wholly owned subsidiary of Cape Plc and was engaged in the business of manufacturing incombustible asbestos. David Chandler was an employee of Cape Products between 1959 and 1962. In 2007 he discovered that he had contracted asbestosis as a result of exposure to asbestos dust. By that time Cape Products no longer existed and had had no policy of insurance that would indemnify it against claims for asbestosis. David Chandler brought proceedings against Cape Plc for negligence alleging that it owed and had breached a duty of care towards

Show More
Related

  • Equuscorc Case Study

    1302 Words  | 3 Pages

    There is one appellant and three respondents involved in these proceedings. Equuscorp Pty Ltd (referred to as “Equuscorp”) is the appellant. Ian Haxton, Robert Bassat and Cunningham’s Warehouse Sales Pty Ltd (referred to as “the respondents”) are the respondents. This matter was heard in the High Court of Australia in front of Chief Justice French and Judges Gummow, Heydon, Crennan, Kiefel and Bell.

    Read More

  • Isaac Jackson Case Study Answers

    413 Words  | 1 Pages

    All information about the following characters in the case study were retrieved and/or inferred from A Consequence of Testing ALL Students article.

    Read More

  • R. V. Keegstra Case Study

    1429 Words  | 3 Pages

    As instructed in the outline for this assignment, I have read and analysed the case of R. v. Keegstra. I have understood the allegations placed and the defence of the same. Also, I have answered the questions provided explaining the rights at stake, the procedure that court adopted to reach to a final decision and that whether or not it was able to reach a balance between the individual and the group rights.

    Read More

  • ASIC V. Rich 2009: NSWSC 1229

    1000 Words  | 2 Pages

    Corporations functioning within the jurisdiction of the Australian Commonwealth are governed and regulated by the provisions of the Corporations Act, 2001. Common law principles developed through judicial

    Read More

  • Defying the Odds: Becoming a Successful Corporate Lawyer

    1462 Words  | 3 Pages

    Throughout modern civilization, the American republic is widely known for its dependency upon the realm of business. Equally as vital, looms the ever-present hand of the American law system. “All beings have their laws: the Deity…man his laws” (Montesquieu,1), this statement serves true in founding that law is consistently a necessary portion in society because all society desires law. As a consequence of the continual presence of law, careers aimed to interpret the crevices of laws, and to defend them, are synonymously as necessary in society. Absolutely, the gain of America’s economy is a direct reflection of the lawyers who protect them. Lawyers are a necessity to the nation; serving their purpose as defenders of the law. The system of corporate law is undoubtedly the cornerstone of corporate finance, and as citizens begin to thrive more immensely in a capitalistic nation, legal representation will be the trailblazer to the continuation of the American system of corporations. As I embark upon the journey of excellence into the world of corporate law, I endeavor to change the way business is defended, upheld, and represented.

    Read More

  • Russell Compton Case Study

    774 Words  | 2 Pages

    Ms. Compton was born in Cottonport, Louisiana; at the age of three, she and her family moved to Palms Springs, California. Ms. Compton reported growing up in Houston, Texas. She considers her family’s socioeconomic level to have been middle working class. Her parents are Lucille Perkins and Russell Compton. Ms. Compton described her father as loving and caring. Russell Compton’s educational background was some college and he was a Vietnam Veteran. Ms. Compton loved that her father was accepting and loving. The one thing she would change about her father was for him to have been more active during her childhood. Ms. Compton reported speaking with her father a few times a week and sees him quite often.

    Read More

  • STEALTH SOFTWARE Case Study

    1601 Words  | 4 Pages

    59. Plaintiff has clearly illustrated that each of the foreign business entities named herein as co-defendants are the alter ego of WARRENS because each share unity of ownership, officer, directors, management and actually operated as a single economic entity such that it would be inequitable to uphold a legal distinction between them.

    Read More

  • Tesco and The Horsemeat Scandal

    1398 Words  | 3 Pages

    Bibliography: Turnbull, S. (1997). Corporate governance: its scope, concerns and theories. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 5 (4), pp. 180--205.

    Read More

  • Chris Peterson Case Analysis

    1086 Words  | 3 Pages

    DSS was designed to place administrative assistance in small western school districts in 1997. There were three founding members whose goal was to help school districts that had limited staff to deal with certain administrative issues such as labor agreements and procurement systems. The company has grown to remain a viable business it must expand its book of business. The company had focused its attention on increasing small school districts as potential clients. But know they want to develop products that would encompass both the small and large school district. As the company tried to expand their business they found that their corporate structure needed to change to better address the needs of its clients. With change sometimes brings

    Read More

  • The Albazero Case Study

    892 Words  | 2 Pages

    According to Corporation Act 2001 s124(1), it illustrates that ‘’A company has the legal capacity and powers of an individual both in and outside the jurisdiction” . As it were, company as a legal individual must be freely with all its capital contribution shall embrace liability for its legal actions and obligations of the company’s shareholders is limited to its investment to the company. This ‘separate legal entity’ principle was established in the case of Salomon v Salomon & Co Ltd [1987] as company was held to have conducted the business as a legal person and separate from its members. It demonstrated that the debt of company is belonged to the company but not to the shareholders. Shareholders have only right to participate in managing but not in sharing the company property. Besides ,the Macaura v Northern Assurance Co Ltd [1925] demonstrates that the distinction between the shareholders and company assets. It means that even Mr Macaura owned almost all the shares in the company, he had no insurable interest in the company’s asset. The other recent case is the Lee v Lee’s Air Farming Ltd [1961] which illustrates that the distinct legal entities between employee ad director allows Mr.Lee function in dual capacities. It resulted that the corporation can contract with the controlling member of the corporation.

    Read More

  • Companies and the UK Insolvency Law

    666 Words  | 2 Pages

    The re-use of an insolvent company is protected by UK insolvency law. It helps to protect the interests of investors and creditors are not damaged by a lack of transparency relating to the director's involvement with an insolvent company, and continued involvement with its phoenix.

    Read More

  • Piercing the Corporate Veil

    512 Words  | 2 Pages

    Piercing the Corporate Veil Since the establishment in Salomon v Salomon, the separate legal personality has been long recognised in English law for centuries, that is to say, a limited liability company has its own legal identity distinct from its shareholders or directors. However, in certain circumstances the courts may be prepared to look behind the company at the actions of the directors and shareholders. This is known as "piercing the corporate veil". There are numerous cases concerning the "piercing the corporate veil", among which, Jones v Lipman[1] was a typical case. Lipman sold land to Jones by a written contract but refused to complete the sale because of another good deal, instead he offered damages for breach of contract.

    Read More

  • Stressuality, And Personality

    1449 Words  | 3 Pages

    Each and every person is unique. “An individual’s identity is who or what a person is; the name or essential character that identifies somebody.” Examples would include beliefs, ethnicity, values, choices, habits, interests, and finally, sexuality (Napolitano, 2010, p. 104). “Identity is a term used throughout to describe individuals as a discrete, separate entity and is how a person is defined.” It could also include their name, gender and race. On the other hand, personality would be qualities and traits of a person’s character. Their personality could be defined from their behaviour, emotion and thought, such as their humour, attractiveness or their intelligence. Personality is the totality of somebody’s attitudes, interests, behavioural

    Read More

  • The Relevance of the Salomon v. Salomon Case

    1671 Words  | 4 Pages

    Salomon v Salomon was and still is a landmark case. By confirming the legitimacy of Mr Salomon's company the House of Lords put forward the concept of separate corporate personality and limited liability. Inextricably linked with this ratio is an acknowledgement of the importance of certainty within the law, thus separate corporate personality becomes a concrete principle to which the law must adhere. Salomon v Salomon is followed in subsequent cases, notably Macaura v Northern Assurance Co.[3] and Lee v Lee's Air Farming Ltd[4]. These cases highlight the reality of the separate corporate identity and take it a step further in stressing the distinction between a company's identity and that of its shareholders.

    Read More

  • The Principle of Separate Corporate Personality

    2542 Words  | 6 Pages

    The Principle of Separate Corporate Personality The principle of separate corporate personality has been firmly established in the common law since the decision in the case of Salomon v Salomon & Co Ltd[1], whereby a corporation has a separate legal personality, rights and obligations totally distinct from those of its shareholders. Legislation and courts nevertheless sometimes "pierce the corporate veil" so as to hold the shareholders personally liable for the liabilities of the corporation. Courts may also "lift the corporate veil", in the conflict of laws in order to determine who actually controls the corporation, and thus to ascertain the corporation's true contacts, and closest and most real connection. Throughout the course of this assignment I will begin by explaining the concept of legal personality and describe the veil of incorporation. I will give examples of when the veil of incorporation can be lifted by the courts and statuary provisions such as s.24 CA 1985 and incorporate the varying views of judges as to when the veil can be lifted.

    Read More

More about Solomon Case Study

Open Document