Does Salomon v. Salomon Still Reign? A Disquisition on Recent Case Law on Corporate Legal Personality and Lifting the Veil

Sylvester Udemezue
{"title":"Does Salomon v. Salomon Still Reign? A Disquisition on Recent Case Law on Corporate Legal Personality and Lifting the Veil","authors":"Sylvester Udemezue","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3806398","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<br><br>The principle established in the UK House of Lords` case of Salomon v Salomon (1897) AC 22 is universally known as the concept of Corporate Legal Personality. The implications of the concept include that the liability of members of a company is limited to the amount of their unpaid shares. While the principle is placed on a broad foundation, useful and convenient, it ought to, like many other rules, be received with some qualifications, especially in view of the fact that it has sometimes been relied upon to defraud creditors, to evade existing obligations, to circumvent statutes, or to protect knavery or crime. Occasional piercing of the veil of incorporation is thus considered both desirable and necessary with a view to ensuring that the concept is not used successfully for such negative ends. This paper discusses the concept of Corporate Legal Personality, its implications and continued usefulness in the light of the negative ends to which it is sometimes deployed. The paper's suggestion that the concept remains indispensable for the overall preservation of the sanctity of the corporate world, is followed by a dispassionate discussion of current case law on Corporate Legal Personality and Lifting of Corporate Veil. Then follow a brief analysis of the circumstances that may justify lifting of the veil, conclusion and recommendations.","PeriodicalId":83420,"journal":{"name":"University of Michigan journal of law reform. University of Michigan. Law School","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"University of Michigan journal of law reform. University of Michigan. Law School","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3806398","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract



The principle established in the UK House of Lords` case of Salomon v Salomon (1897) AC 22 is universally known as the concept of Corporate Legal Personality. The implications of the concept include that the liability of members of a company is limited to the amount of their unpaid shares. While the principle is placed on a broad foundation, useful and convenient, it ought to, like many other rules, be received with some qualifications, especially in view of the fact that it has sometimes been relied upon to defraud creditors, to evade existing obligations, to circumvent statutes, or to protect knavery or crime. Occasional piercing of the veil of incorporation is thus considered both desirable and necessary with a view to ensuring that the concept is not used successfully for such negative ends. This paper discusses the concept of Corporate Legal Personality, its implications and continued usefulness in the light of the negative ends to which it is sometimes deployed. The paper's suggestion that the concept remains indispensable for the overall preservation of the sanctity of the corporate world, is followed by a dispassionate discussion of current case law on Corporate Legal Personality and Lifting of Corporate Veil. Then follow a brief analysis of the circumstances that may justify lifting of the veil, conclusion and recommendations.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
所罗门诉所罗门案还在统治吗?公司法人人格与揭开面纱的近代判例法研究
在英国上议院的所罗门诉所罗门案(1897)AC 22中确立的原则被普遍称为公司法人人格的概念。这一概念的含义包括,公司成员的责任仅限于他们未付股份的数额。虽然这一原则是建立在广泛、有用和方便的基础上的,但它应该像许多其他规则一样,受到一些限制,特别是考虑到它有时被用来欺骗债权人、逃避现有义务、规避法规或保护欺诈或犯罪的事实。因此,偶尔打破合并的面纱被认为是可取和必要的,以确保这一概念不被成功地用于这种消极目的。本文讨论了公司法人人格的概念,它的含义和持续的有用性,鉴于消极的目的,它有时被部署。本文提出,这一概念对于全面维护公司世界的神圣性仍然是不可或缺的,然后是对公司法人人格和揭开公司面纱的现行判例法的冷静讨论。然后简要分析可能证明揭开面纱、结论和建议是合理的情况。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A System Out of Balance: A Critical Analysis of Philosophical Justifications for Copyright Law Through the Lenz of Users' Rights Giving the Fourth Amendment Meaning: Creating an Adversarial Warrant Proceeding to Protect From Unreasonable Searches and Seizures Private Caregiver Presumption For Elder Caregivers The Short Unhappy Life of the Negotiation Class Former Whistleblowers: Why the False Claims Act's Anti-Retaliation Provision Should Protect Former Employees
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1