Lifting the Veil: Imagination and the Kingdom of God

Product Information

The corporate veil may be lifted where the statute itself contemplates lifting the veil or fraud or improper conduct is intended to be prevented.

Not actually lifting the veil, not saying that we are entity merely saying that one entity is bound by the actions of the other. The alter-ego theory considers if there is in distinctive nature of the boundaries between the corporation and its shareholders. Generally, the plaintiff has to prove that the incorporation was merely a formality and that the corporation neglected corporate formalities and protocols, such as voting to approve major corporate actions in the context of a duly authorized corporate meeting. This is quite often the case when a corporation facing legal liability transfers its assets and business to another corporation with the same management and shareholders. It also happens with single person corporations that are managed in a haphazard manner. As such, the veil can be pierced in both civil cases and where regulatory proceedings are taken against a shell corporation.Notably, similar to most legal principles, the overarching rule of SLP applies with exceptions, where the courts may look through the veil to reach out to the insider members, known as “ lifting or piercing of the corporate veil“. 15

Gilford Motor Co. v. Horne [xiv]–This is an instance for prevention of façade or sham. In this case, an employee entered into an agreement that after his employment is terminated he shall not enter into a competing business or he should not solicit their customers by setting up his own business. After the defendant’s service was terminated, he set up a company of the same business.In most jurisdictions, no bright-line rule exists and the ruling is based on common law precedents. In the United States, different theories, most important "alter ego" or "instrumentality rule", attempted to create a piercing standard. Mostly, they rest upon three basic prongs—namely: [42]

However, the theories failed to articulate a real-world approach which courts could directly apply to their cases. Thus, courts struggle with the proof of each prong and rather analyze all given factors. This is known as "totality of circumstances". [43]

Cite This Work

Rands, William J. (1998). "Domination of a Subsidiary by a Parent" (PDF). Indiana Law Review. 32: 421 . Retrieved 9 September 2017. Assmann, Jan (1997). Moses the Egyptian: The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism. Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-58738-0. Marc Moore, ‘A Temple Built on Faulty Foundations: Piercing the Corporate Veil and the Legacy of Salomon v Salomon’ (2006) JBL 180. PUBLIC INTEREST- The Courts may lift the veil to protect public policy and prevent transactions contrary to public policy. The Courts will rely on this ground when lifting the veil is the most ‘just’ result, but there are no specific grounds for lifting the veil. Thus, where there is a conflict with public policy, the Courts ignore the form and take into account the substance. Statutory Provisions For Lifting The Veil-

P.W. Ireland, ‘The Rise of the Limited Liability Company’ (1984) 12 International Journal of the Sociology of Law 239. United States v. Milwaukee Refrigerator Transit Company [xii]–In this case, the U.S. Supreme Court held that “where the notion of legal entity is used to defeat public convenience, justify wrong, protect fraud or defend crime, the law will disregard the corporate entity and treat it as an association of persons.” TL Hazen and JW Markham, Corporations and Other Business Enterprises (2003) ISBN 0-314-26476-0 pg. 124–144. The motif was based on a statue of Isis, or of the goddess Neith who was sometimes equated with her, in the Egyptian city of Sais mentioned by the Greco-Roman authors Plutarch and Proclus. They claimed the statue bore an inscription saying "I am all that has been and is and shall be; and no mortal has ever lifted my mantle." Illustrations of Isis with her veil being lifted were popular from the late 17th to the early 19th century, often as allegorical representations of Enlightenment science and philosophy uncovering nature's secrets. Authors at the end of the 18th century, foreshadowing the Romantic movement, began using the lifting of Isis's veil as a metaphor for revealing awe-inspiring truth. Helena Blavatsky, in Isis Unveiled in 1877, used the metaphor for the spiritual truths that her Theosophical belief system hoped to discover, and modern ceremonial magic includes a ritual called the Rending of the Veil to bring the magician to a higher state of spiritual awareness. Section 239– Power of inspector to investigate affairs of another company in same group or management: It provides that if it is necessary for the satisfactory completion of the task of an inspector appointed to investigate the affairs of the company for the alleged mismanagement, or oppressive policy towards its members, he may investigate into the affairs of another related company in the same management or group.Kinney Shoe Corp. v. Polan, 939 F.2d 209 (4th Cir. 1991). [48] The veil was pierced where its enforcement would not have matched the purpose of limited liability. Here a corporation was undercapitalized and was only used to shield a shareholder's other company from debts. Another interpretation of Isis's veil emerged in the late 18th century, in keeping with the Romantic movement that was developing at the time, in which nature constitutes an awe-inspiring mystery rather than prosaic knowledge. [11]