Salomon Principle

It seems understandable that a business should exist as a separate legal personality as it would be impossible for an individual’s motives and goals to be perfectly in line with that of the company as is demonstrated above in Salomon. Following this theory the idea that the rights and duties of a company are not that of its members and shareholders as demonstrated in the case of Lee v Lee Air Farming .

Woodward, S., Bird, H. & Sievers, S. (2005). Corporations Law in Principle 7th ed. Pyrmont, NSW: Lawbook Co.

Limited Company – Organisations set up to run your business. They must adhere to legislation such as The Companies Act 2006. This act sets out duties the appointed director holds. For example, to ‘act within your power as a company director’. These businesses need to be registered with Companies House and must submit any important

This paper will seek to identify any breaches of Common Law, Equitable principles, sections 180-184 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), and any other breaches of the aforementioned Act specifically dealing with Takeovers, whilst describing any appropriate remedies that may be available for said breaches.

This research essay aims to assess the development in laws of corporate manslaughter. Corporate manslaughter is a criminal offence in English law, being an act of homicide committed by a company or organization. The section 1 of the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 (hereinafter referred as “CMCHA 2007”) defines the offence. An organization will be liable, if because of the activities conducted by the organization,

In order to explain the statement this essay will explore the background to treating companies as distinct legal entities; review certain cases trying to pierce

Choosing a Corporation/Company Structure - the business structure of a company/ corporation is highly recommended, it has the flexibility to gain more capital, or credit capability and assets used as security. Based on the Corporation Act 2001 (Cth) AC 22, a corporation is another legal entity with their own legal rights, duties and responsibilities separate to the individual or owner of the company (Harris, Hargovan & Adams, 2013, pp 229). The risk and consequences are one of the principal considerations of choosing a company structure (Harris, Hargovan & Adams, pp 50). Based on the “Corporate Veil” Liability is owned by a separate legal entity and not to the extent of the owner, for instance, the debt of the company is not a personal liability, but the company. This is further explained in the case below.

This essay will mainly analyze and discuss some relevant legal principles and terms related to the judicial observation on legal position that the judge made in the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Yazaki Corporation case. Therefore, it is necessary to cover the following key issues: 1. Definition and explanations of separate legal entity doctrine and corporate groups. 2. When will a subsidiary company be recognized as an agent of its parent. 3. Under what circumstances can corporate veil be ignored or lifted.

Although doctrine of separate legal entity has the greatest importance in company law, it contains weaknesses that could be arguable. Professor Kahn-Freund described the doctrine as “calamitous” because it arise many issues, such as “How is it possible to check the one-man company and other abuse of company law?” Separate legal entity is inadequate for complex problems .

For the purposes of this assignment the relevant law is the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (either as the “Act” of the “CA”). From now on I will refer to it as the Act (Hinchy, McDermott 2008).

The concept of a company being a separate legal entity is the most striking illustration in separating the company from its owners. A paramount principle of corporate law is that no shareholder or member of a company is made liable for the obligations incurred by such incorporations A company is different from its members in the eyes of law. In continuations to this the opposite also holds true in the sense that neither can the company be held liable for the acts of its members. It is a fundamental distinction that a company is distinct from its members.

Company has many advantages and disadvantages. One of the greatest advantages is limited liability whereby the shareholders only risk whatever amount they invested to the business and does not risk their personal possession in case if the business fails. Unlike sole proprietor and partnership are each liable for all the debts of the business (unlimited liability). For example, if the asset of the sole proprietor and partnership cannot settle the debt, the creditor can go after their personal asset (i.e house, bank account etc). On the other hand, the shareholder, investor or partner are not liable if the company runs out of funds.

‘Lifting the corporate veil’ has been the topic of interest for the legal profession. This principle mentions to the possibility of considering towards the company structureor the company’s separate personality to make the members liable towards their company’s debt. In respect of a limited liability company , this has been the most favoured business form for investors.Being a shareholder means that individuals obtain unlimited corporation’s profit whereas they are liable for company’s debts not over value of their shares. With a company limited by shares, a member is not liable for the company’s debts beyond the amount remaining unpaid on his or her shares. As a result, the company’s creditors cannot seek compensation from the shareholders although the company has inadequate funds to pay its own liabilities in full.

This doctrine has been seen as a “two- edged sword,” reason being that at a general level while it was seen as a good decision in that by establishing that corporations are separate legal entities, Salomon 's case endowed the company with the entire requisite attributes with which to become the powerhouse of capitalism. At a particular level, however, it was a bad decision. By extending the benefits of incorporation to small private enterprises, Salomon 's case has promoted fraud and the evasion of legal obligations.

Corporation origin from the Latin word Corpus which means body. It is formed by a group of people and has separate rights and liability from those individual. In any means, corporation exists independently from its owner and this principle is called the doctrine of separate personality. Doctrine of separate personality is the basic and fundamental principle in a Company Law. This principle outline the legal relationship between company and its members. Company’s assets belong to the company not the shareholders as assets are the equity for creditors. Company must use up all its assets to pay off the creditors if it became insolvent. The same applies to the corporation’s debts. For limited liabilities company, the shareholder liability is limited which means that the shareholder is restricted to the number of shares they paid and not personally liable for the corporation’s debts. If the company does not have enough equity to pay off debts, the creditors cannot come after the shareholders. However, limited liability company can be very powerful when in hands who do fraud and on defeating creditors’ claims. Courts then can ignore the doctrine for exception cases and lifting the corporate veil. Lifting the corporate veil is a situation where courts put aside limited liability and hold a corporation’s shareholders or directors personally liable for the corporation’s debts.