Search results

The corporate veil or veil of incorporation is a legal concept that separates the legal and juristic personality of a company from its members, directors and other stakeholders. Indeed, common law has provided for numerous circumstances in which the corporate veil of a company may be lifted, and courts rely on these case law precedents to determine the grounds for lifting the corporate veil. However, there is limited case law regarding environmental torts as a ground for lifting the veil of incorporation and there is no legal provision in Mauritius which recognises environmental crimes as an exception to corporate veil. Consequently, this paper aims to discuss the liability of decision-makers of a company in the case of corporate environmental wrongdoings and thereafter, to present a case for amending Mauritius laws to give recognition to environmental torts as a ground of lifting the corporate veil.

This paper has adopted the black-letter approach and the comparative research methodology. The laws of Mauritius on corporate veil will be compared to the related laws of the USA and Canada with the view of seeking recommendations for Mauritius, as these countries are known to have an extensive legal framework on environmental crimes as a ground to lift the corporate veil.

It is concluded that it is high time for Mauritius to adopt a separate manslaughter law that would incorporate crimes committed to the environment by corporate bodies as a ground for lifting the corporate veil and thereby attacking individual stakeholders concerned.

This study is among the first researches conducted in the field of environmental torts as a ground for lifting the corporate veil in Mauritius.

In different recent judgments, the Jordanian Court of Cassation, among many other Jordanian Courts, has found that a limited liability company's shareholder may be held liable in addition to the company itself as to claims related to the company's debits and different obligations. While the aforementioned approach does constitute a departure from the well-established former approach that the same Court has followed for a long period, the Court have unsurprisingly brought up different interpretations to the insufficient provisions that the Jordanian Companies' Law no. 22 of the year 1997 does contain pertaining this specific area of law. Accordingly, this paper aims to attempt to point out and critically examine the aforementioned Courts' decisions and law provisions to demonstrate the extent to which limited liability companies in Jordan are truly limited in liability and whether such Courts have pierced the corporate veil for adequate reasons.

To examine the extent to which limited liability companies in Jordan are truly limited in liability, this work uses the most relevant secondary data available in this relation as the main method to complete such examination and this shall include different interrelated law provisions, case law and jurisprudence. Through critically analyzing and comparing such data, this work will identify the problems connected to this specific area of law and accordingly proposes different recommendations and conclusions.

This work submits that the aforementioned Courts and Legislator have not dealt with such a matter in an adequate and comprehensive manner and that they should have addressed this area of law in a different and more specific way. Furthermore, this work argues that while the reasons behind the Courts' decisions shall be respected, the distinct characteristics that brought up limited liability companies into practice shall be also respected and left intact.

Taking into consideration the recent different approach followed by the Jordanian Courts to this specific area of law, and as far as the author is aware, it would not be surprising to say that there is no comprehensive and updated scholarly work which has either examined such an issue or addressed its implications from technical and legal standpoints. This paper receives its originality and value from being the first work that examines and addresses such important matter.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the available judicial precedence using both the United Arab Emirates and UK laws to bring up a much broader understanding of wrongful and fraudulent trading concepts and provide a critical analysis of potential personal liabilities of directors in the UK and UAE jurisdictions for the acts of fraud and mismanagement.

This paper seeks to understand corporate fraud from the aspect of trading. It will take an in-depth look into wrongful trading and fraudulent trading in the UAE and UK jurisdictions while analyzing the punishment for the same. The study will also look at famous cases for the same while seeking to understand the mitigation measures undertaken in various nations across the world.

The author studies the contents and provisions of the UK Insolvency Act 1986, truly the concepts of wrongful trading and fraudulent trading are not explicitly mentioned in the UAE Law, but the said terms associated with “lifting of corporate veil” are notionally existent under the UAE Federal Law No2/2015, otherwise known as Companies Law (Articles 84 and 162-1), and under the UAE Bankruptcy Law (Federal Decree Law No. 9 of 2016), which provides legislation governing trading while the company is insolvent.

In the current paper, the author is keen to examine the available judicial precedence to bring up a much broader understanding of the mentioned concepts and provide a critical analysis of potential personal liabilities of directors in the UK and UAE jurisdictions for the acts of fraud and mismanagement.

The paper examines case law and statutory provisions related to lifting the corporate veil. The aim of the paper is to explore recent case law in order to determine whether courts have moved away from an overly restrictive approach when dealing with cases relating to the corporate personality. To offer a full account of the exceptions to the corporate personality doctrine, this paper also examines cases where the veil of incorporation is lifted due to a breach of a statutory provision.

The paper reviews recent case law and statutory provisions relating to lifting the corporate veil. The paper critically reviews the exceptions to the corporate personality doctrine which amount to lifting the corporate veil.

The paper finds that courts are more willing to lift the corporate veil compared to before. They have moved away from the restrictive approach and this is demonstrated by the tendency to find new exceptions to the corporate personality doctrine such as the interests of justice argument or lifting the veil in tort cases.

The paper offers an up-to-date assessment of the exceptions to the corporate personality doctrine and highlights the growing tendency to finding new ways of lifting the corporate veil.

The paper's aim is to analyze and assess the importance of a recent US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit decision in the case of Sun Capital Partners III LP v. New England Teamsters and Trucking Industry Pension Fund with respect to the court's conclusion that a private equity fund constitutes a “trade or business” for purposes of the ERISA multiemployer pension withdrawal liability and that, therefore, the fund could, under a “piercing the veil” type of approach, be held liable for the ERISA withdrawal liability of a bankrupt portfolio company.

The paper provides historical background on termination and withdrawal liability under ERISA; explains the facts of the Sun Capital case; and offers preliminary reflections on the “investment plus” approach in ERISA context, the significance of the offset mechanism, why the Sun Capital decision is a significant victory for the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, the liability of one portfolio company for the pension obligations of other portfolio companies owned by the same private equity fund, potential unintended consequences for tax-advantaged benefit plans of portfolio companies; the possibility that different pension plans at different portfolio companies may violate non-discrimination rules, the application of Sun Capital beyond ERISA, and the potential effect of this ruling on taxation of carried interest.

The employer and all “trades or businesses” in its “controlled group, including, under certain circumstances, a private equity fund, are liable for the employer's share of unfunded pension liabilities if the employer withdraws from a multi-employer defined-benefit pension plan.

Practical guidance from experienced financial services lawyers is given in the paper.

The objective of this research paper is to identify specific attributes associated with the shell companies, so that the frauds committed by misuse of the corporate vehicle are curbed. The presence of an identified attribute increases the fraud risk the company poses to the economic system. The efficient allocation of limited investigative resources may accordingly be made by the regulator.

The research was designed as a case study involving documentary evidence corroborated by archival records and semi‐structured interview. The paper discusses the identification of attributes associated with shell companies and suggests recommendations for corporate regulatory machinery in India.

The research paper has identified a few attributes associated with the shell companies. These attributes are directly related to the fraud risk an incorporated entity may pose to the economic system. Limited resources may be efficiently deployed on the basis of the risk an entity poses to the system.

The findings of the research are yet to be verified and authenticated by an independent study. However, the findings have a wider implication with respect to more efficient deployment of investigative resources dependent on the risk parameters.

The research paper is a pioneer effort in the field of frauds by misuse of a corporate vehicle.

This paper aims to examine the Salomon principle of separate legal personality and its impact on the regulation of directors’ remuneration in the UK. The aim of the paper is to explore the Salomon principle to determine whether it serves as a driving factor for directors’ remuneration levels. The paper will also examine the restrictive approach of the courts to move away from the principle and their reluctance to get involved in directors’ remuneration issues of a company. The paper explains the Salomon principle, describes the nature of the problem on directors’ remuneration and provides an analysis on how the Salomon principle impacts on the directors’ remuneration.

The paper reviews case law, statutory provisions and academic opinions on the directors’ remuneration and the concept of separate legal entity. The paper critically reviews the impact of the concept of separate entity on directors’ remuneration.

The paper finds that the courts are reluctant to come away from the concept of separate legal personality as well as reluctant to get involved with directors’ remuneration. This reluctance of the court makes the concept of separate legal personality to act as one of the drivers of directors’ remuneration.

The paper offers a different explanation into why directors’ remuneration continuous to be an issue in the UK. It points out that the concept of separate legal personality is a potential driver of directors’ remuneration in the UK.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse how the liabilities arise in the UK-based parent company for wrongdoings of its overseas subsidiaries, especially under law of tort.

Qualitative methods have been used in this paper, using both primary and secondary data, i.e. Books, case Laws, legislations, international laws and journal articles.

The English Courts are, now, more broadly accepting the allegations against the UK-based parent companies for the actions of its subsidiaries, especially by improving the access to the remedy in the UK for foreign victims of corporate related harms, though concern remains in the case of criminal liabilities. Additionally, in case of the civil litigations, the early settlement of a dispute is also causing pressure to the victim by liming the wider deterrent effect.

This paper will help the lawyers and academic in the field of international corporate law, especially in the tortious claim of an overseas victim in the UK Court. Moreover, this paper identifies the lack of proper legislative guidance in this field.

The article aims to reflect the present legal position in regard to the upsurging human rights violations by powerful multinational corporations in India and the need of controlling it. This is one area of law which needs to be addressed at the earliest, at an international level by many stake-holders such as companies, legislature, judges, human rights activists and students.

Doctrinaire research methodology using secondary sources.

Human rights violations in corporate arena is upsurging. Lack of good governance mechanisms and vigilances are reasons. Progressive laws are sought at both international and national which can maintain the balance between international and national endeavours to control such issues.

This is not much highlighted issue and hence is updated to various legislations across the world which talks about this issue.

‘As Gregor Samsa awoke one morning from uneasy dreams, he found himself transformed in his bed into a gigantic insect. He was laying on his hard, as it were armour-plated, back and when he lifted his head a little, he could see his domelike brown belly divided into stiff arched segments on top of which the bed quilt could hardly keep in position and was about to slide off completely. His numerous legs, which were pitifully thin compared to the rest of his bulk, waved helplessly before his eyes’ (Kafka, The Metamorphosis, 1915, p. 19).

Kafka's The Metamorphosis (1915) appears in disability theory to aid explanation for those who experience acquired disability. This allegory offers a visceral picture of what a person can go through; there is a before and an after, a death and a life. I was able-bodied, capable, bursting with energy and then I woke up one morning utterly transformed. I no longer recognise myself; my consciousness mourns my previous existence, and I must come to terms with my reconstituted self.

It is that ‘other’ that I identify with now and, to discover what that means, I began composing a Requiem Mass. I have a long love affair with them; I have sung and conducted them and their ability to pierce the veil between life and death is of particular significance to me. This chapter examines the ways in which my acquired disability, this mystical death, impacts and informs my composition.