
handle: 11427/13510
According to the decision in Salomon a company is recognised as a legal entity separate and distinct from its shareholders. Although this fundamental rule has had a considerable influence in company law worldwide, it cannot be absolute and, as such, must allow for exceptions where the courts may disregard the separate legal personality of the company. The general rule is that a court will pierce the corporate veil “only where special circumstances exist indicating that it is a mere façade concealing the true facts, so that the separate existence of the company is in some sense being abused or, at least, is not being maintained in the full sense, with the result that separates between the company and its members does not in fact exist. However the courts uniformly exercise significant discretion, and fail to offer a clear standard for veil piercing.”4 Besides company law, this research paper also considers other areas of law where this principle has been applied. These include labour law, criminal (corporate liability) and maritime law.
Includes bibliographical references.
Commercial Law
Commercial Law
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
