Is piercing the veil contrary to high authority? A footnote to the "never-ending story"

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

35 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Reviews the Supreme Court ruling in VTB Capital Plc v Nutritek International Corp, and reflects on Lord Neuberger's argument that piercing the corporate veil is "contrary to high authority". Examines the background to the decision, details the court's treatment of the earlier House of Lords ruling in Woolfson v Strathclyde RC, and analyses the ratio of Woolfson and that of the House of Lords judgment in Salomon v Salomon. Considers the opportunity for the Supreme Court to provide further clarification of the power to pierce the veil in a forthcoming case, and to explain when it should be done
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)352-355
JournalThe Company Lawyer
Volume34
Issue number11
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Is piercing the veil contrary to high authority? A footnote to the "never-ending story"'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this