'There is no justification for the doctrine of piercing the veil, which undermines the fundamental principles of company and creates unnecessary uncertainty' Discuss.
Member rating: No Rating | Words: | Submitted: Mon Jun 19 2006
On the left is an image preview of every page of this document, and below are the first 150 words with formatting removed:
'There is no justification for the doctrine of piercing the veil, which undermines the fundamental principles of company and creates unnecessary uncertainty.' Discuss One of the fundamental principles of a company is the notion that a company is recognised as a separate from its members. This doctrine as first established in Salomon v Salomon1 states "Once the company is legally incorporated it must be treated like any other independent person with its rights and liabilities appropriate to itself2" The notion separate legal personality of a company is often expressed as the veil of incorporation and it is on this principle that it is the company itself rather than its members or directors which are liable on its contracts and its debts. However, in some circumstances the court has been asked to disregard the veil of incorporation, effectively 'piercing' it to reveal the reality of who owns and controls the company. In this, there is...


