Nobody downloaded yet

Company Law - English law - Case Study Example

Comments (0) Cite this document
'The company is at law a different person altogether from the subscribers. Nor are subscribers as members liable, in any shape or form, except to the extent and in the manner provided by the [Companies] Act.'2
It is a general principle of English law that it is not possible in the absence of agency, a trust relationship or wrongful trading to hold one person liable for the debts of another.3 However, like most common law principles and judicial interpretations it is a rebuttable presumption which must give way to a statement to the contrary 'in clear and unequivocal language'4 by Parliament…
Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
GRAB THE BEST PAPER91.9% of users find it useful
Company Law - English law
Read TextPreview

Extract of sample "Company Law - English law"

Download file to see previous pages Commentators have attempted to categorise those decisions under various headings, such as agency, fraud, group enterprise, tort and so forth6. What is clear on a close reading of the cases which have distinguished Salomon is that the courts will only interfere - by lifting the veil of incorporation - where there is clear evidence of wrongdoing or where they are required to interfere by Statute. There is therefore a presumption that members of a limited company are only liable to the extent of any unpaid amount on nominal value of their shares unless 'wrongdoing' can be established.
LJM Limited seems to have been incorporated for the sole intention of providing a vehicle for the directors Jean, Lynette and Lauren to unlawfully deprive W&H Limited, its shareholders and its members of its corporate assets and any retained profits from the international contract.
There is authority to suggest that the courts will lift the veil to prevent evasion of an existing obligation7 and the court will grant an injunction/specific performance in that instance. For a short while it also seemed to be the case that the court would lift the veil where there was clear evidence of asset stripping.
In Creasey v. Breachwood Motors Ltd [1992]8 proprietors of Breachwood Welwyn Ltd transferred that company's assets to the defendant company. The evidence indicated that the defendant company had been formed for the sole purpose of avoiding the payment of a substantial wrongful dismissal claim. Breachwood Welwyn Ltd was then struck off the company register following the procedure laid down in Section 652 of the Companies Act 1985; hence depriving the plaintiff of any redress. Robert Southwell QC, sitting as deputy High Court Judge, held that the plaintiff could present his claim for damages directly against the new company, Breachwood Motors Limited, as its sole purpose was to strip Breachwood Welwyn's assets and deprive Creasey of redress.
The decision in Creasey was unequivocally overruled in Ord & Another v Belhaven Pubs Ltd [1998] by the Court of Appeal. Hobhouse L.J said:
" Creasey v. Breachwood . represents a wrong adoption of the principle of piercing the corporate veil. Therefore, in my judgement the case of Creasey v. Breachwood should no longer be treated as authoritative".
The Court of Appeal cited its previous decision in Adams v. Cape Industries plc [1990]9 where plaintiffs were not able to seek redress from a holding company when its subsidiary (the defendant) went into liquidation. The House of Lords have endorsed this stricter interpretation of Salomon more recently in Williams v. Natural Life Health Foods Ltd [1998]10. In that case a franchise company had already gone into liquidation by the time a misrepresentation was discovered. The plaintiff sought redress directly from the sole director of the former franchise company. Their Lordships held not only that the corporate veil was sacrosanct and should only be lifted in the most ...Download file to see next pagesRead More
Cite this document
  • APA
  • MLA
(“Company Law - English law Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words”, n.d.)
Retrieved from
(Company Law - English Law Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 Words)
“Company Law - English Law Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 Words”, n.d.
  • Cited: 0 times
Comments (0)
Click to create a comment or rate a document

CHECK THESE SAMPLES OF Company Law - English law

English Law

...? The Principles of Modern Law are Mainly Statute Based ID Number & Total Number of Words: 2,010 Introduction A statute is basically an Act of Parliament (Appelbe and Wingfield, 2009, p. 4). After undergoing a series of scrutiny, a statutory law starts with a written bill that can be converted into laws by the UK parliament. Although it is possible to make use of public bills, some form of private bills were commonly used in the 19th century to persuade the UK parliament to examine the bills before putting it into law (Faragher, 2010, p. 80). In the past, the monarch’s signiture (a.k.a. Royal Assent) is required in passing a statutory law. Today, the...
8 Pages(2000 words)Essay

Nullity of a Company in English Law

...Nullity of a Company in English Law In the ment 'English law has no need of the alien concept of nullity of a company', determining whether itis a correct statement of the legal situation requires answering two separated, but related questions. First, whether or not the concept of nullity of a company is truly an alien concept in English Law; and second, given the answer to the first, whether there is a need to apply the concept of nullity of a company in English Law. In order to answer both questions, and consequently determine whether the aforementioned statement correctly describes the legal situation, this essay will first describe the concept of nullity of a company by describing the concept, determining the legal entity... that it...
10 Pages(2500 words)Case Study

Company Law, Business Law

...May 23, 2006 Academia Research Topic: Exam questions for Business Law (Company Law Adam owns 11% of the shares in a medium-sized company, andthat company owns a chain of fast food outlets around Wales. Apparently, the board of directors has decided to implement two recent special resolutions to alter the articles of association. Additionally, Adam is uncomfortable with the decision of the board of directors because the board of directors no longer needs to obtain the approval of the shareholders for certain high-value transactions. Mostly, the majority rule usually prevails when voting over certain issues pertaining to the company;...
3 Pages(750 words)Essay

Business Law (company law)

...liability company business structure has generally less precedent in terms of case laws. This is due to the fact that it is a relatively newer structure. Form of Limited Liability Company I would advise them to form a partnership form of limited liability Company for the reason that there are three members involved. Thereafter, is would be advisable for them to file Form 8832 which would get the elected as a corporation. Naming of the limited liability company They could definitely retain their current business name if they so desire provided certain rules are observed. The rules that govern the naming of a limited liability company...
8 Pages(2000 words)Essay

The rule in Salomon v Salomon & Co [1897] AC 22 has been described as one of the corner stones of English Company Law. Discuss the rationale and impact of the decision on company law

...of Salomon manages to promote fraud, and the evasion of certain legal obligations. This article explains the impact that Salomon vs. Salomon has had on companies and corporations. Rationale of the Case: On a general perspective, the judgment by the House of Lords was a good decision. This case is recognized all over the world as a good authority, regarding the principle of a corporation being a separate legal entity. Under this case, the House of Lords firmly established that after incorporation, a new and a separate artificial organization comes into existence. Under the law, a company is a distinct person, and it has its own personality, which is separate and independent from the...
10 Pages(2500 words)Assignment

The rule in Salomon v Salomon & Co [1897] AC 22 has been described as one of the corner stones of English Company Law. Discuss the rationale and impact of the decision on company law

...moral positions. Therefore, assigning dishonour to the company following its activities may not essentially decipher directly into dishonour conferring to any person. Although there is a general recognition by the English law that companies are likely to commit crimes, this does not directly connect stigma for criminal activities to the different stakeholders of the company (employees and shareholders just to mention a few). The company effectively shields individuals and thereby allows them to act behind the façade of corporate personality. In addition to the legal persons the companies had since 1897, they have a...
10 Pages(2500 words)Essay

The rule in Salomon v Salomon & Co [1897] AC 22 has been described as one of the corner stones of English Company Law

...THE RATIONALE AND IMPACT OF THE RULE IN SALOMON V SALOMON & CO [1897] AC 22 ON COMPANY LAW Introduction The Salomon decision of 1897 is the core decision that established and confirmed the doctrine of the separation of corporate individuality of an included organisation or company. Since then, the doctrine of separation of official personality attained upon the establishment of a company has been the character of the law governing companies. However, the concept of allowing a company to acquire legal personality was not a creation of the English but had its origin from the Roman laws. Nevertheless, the decision of the House of Lords in the Salomon case was very significant in building strong attitudes in favour for the acceptance... of the...
10 Pages(2500 words)Essay

The rule in Salomon v Salomon & Co [1897] AC 22 has been described as one of the corner stones of English Company Law. Discuss the rationale and impact of the decision on company law

...Rationale and Impact of Salomon v Salmon (1897) acc 22 on English Company Law Introduction The caseof Salomon v Salomon and company (1897) acc 22 was a major decision and rule that affects the judicial process to date. A lot of jurisprudence was set from this case that had awesome magnanimity. The decision reached has from the year of the case, 1897, necessitated overwhelming consequences that define the tenets of company law. In addition, it has been of much reference in the corporate disputes that arise world over. It is a rule that has elicited both praise and criticism in equal measure. It however cemented the doctrine of corporate personality as is established in the Companies act of 1862. This decision was reached to protect... of...
10 Pages(2500 words)Essay

The rule in Salomon v Salomon & Co [1897] AC 22 has been described as one of the corner stones of English Company Law. Discuss the rationale and impact of the decision on company law Corporations Act. The judiciary has consistent reaffirmations of the need of treating the legal doctrine with few exceptions. Subsequent Australian and English decisions of the court uphold the Salomon principle. Since Salomons case had the decision, the entire separation of company and members is rather evident. The ruling stands the test of time even with few exceptions (Routledge. 2010, p 352). In theory, the application of the principle is straightforward. Most theories in the corporate entity are in agreement of the practical essence of artificial personalities that legal systems invest in corporations. All concession theorists regard corporate personality to be privileges the state grants for...
10 Pages(2500 words)Essay

The rule in Salomon v A Salomon & Co Ltd has been described as one of the corner stones of English Company Law, Discuss the rationale and impact of the decisions on company law( do not describe the fact and the decision of the Salomon V A Salomon & Co Ltd

...Rationale and impact of the decisions on company law; Salomon v A Salomon & Co Ltd affiliation Rationale andimpact of the decisions on company law; Salomon v A Salomon & Co Ltd According to the English company Law, the company is viewed as a juristic person. Even though it does not possess the body of a natural being, it has a place in contemplation of law. The company has to depend upon the people, who are in this case natural namely, the officers, directors, corporate managers and shareholders for its day-to-day running and its management1. The natural persons only...
7 Pages(1750 words)Assignment
sponsored ads
We use cookies to create the best experience for you. Keep on browsing if you are OK with that, or find out how to manage cookies.

Let us find you another Case Study on topic Company Law - English law for FREE!

Contact Us