V – Veil of incorporation
31/7/15
WOOD v BAKER [2015] EWHC 2536 (Ch)
The court pierced the corporate veil of companies operated as agents/nominees for a bankrupt and granted an order to trustees in bankruptcy freezing assets held by the companies. The court considered appropriate terms of a limited cross-undertaking.
25/7/13
R v SALE [2013] EWCA Crim 1306
The corporate veil was lifted when assessing the benefit obtained by a defendant for the purpose of a confiscation order made following his conviction for making corrupt gifts to secure work for a company he controlled.
19/6/13
ANTONIO GRAMSCI SHIPPING CORP v AVIARS LEMBERGS [2013] EWCA Civ 730
The doctrine of piercing the corporate veil cannot justify treating an individual as having submitted to the jurisdiction on the basis that he is the controller of a corporate entity which is a party to a contract containing a jurisdiction clause.
12/6/13
PETRODEL RESOURCES LIMITED v PREST [2013] UKSC 34
The court will not pierce the corporate veil unless a person under an existing obligation/liability/restriction deliberately evades the obligation or frustrates enforcement by imposing a company which he controls. On the facts a husband had not evaded or frustrated any legal obligation to his ex-wife. But he had failed to comply with orders for disclosure and the court had been entitled to draw an adverse inference that companies held properties on resulting trust for him. As the husband was beneficial owner of the properties, in matrimonial proceedings the court could order that the properties be transferred to his ex-wife.
6/2/13
VTB CAPITAL PLC v NUTRITEK INTERNATIONAL CORP [2013] UKSC 5
A claimant which loaned money to a company would not be permitted to amend its pleadings to assert a claim that the corporate veil could be pierced to render the company’s owner and controller personally liable as a party to the loan contract along with the company. The principle of piercing the corporate veil had been subject to criticism and it would be inappropriate to extend it to render an individual personally liable as if he were a contracting party.
26/10/12
PETRODEL RESOURCES LTD v PREST [2012] EWCA Civ 1395
The Family courts are required to apply to same test for lifting the corporate veil as all other courts. Impropriety is required. The mere fact that a company was a person’s alter ego is not enough.
29/5/12
ANGLO GERMAN BREWERIES LTD v CHELSEA CORPORATION INC [2012] EWHC 1481 (Ch)
The corporate veil would be pierced where a defendant who owned and controlled a company had transferred property to the company to conceal his assets until a fraud claim against him had been settled.