Yahoo Canada Web Search

Search results

1. lawjournal.mcgill.ca › wp-content › uploadsSalomon v. Salomon and Company, Limited where the House of

   lawjournal.mcgill.ca › wp-content › uploads

   ssion of the. orporate entity must begin with the decisionin S. lomon v. Salomon and Company, Limited 1 where the House ofLords affirmed that incorporation was a privilege open to anyone who could meet the technical requirements of the relevant legislation, and that the corporation once formed must b.

2. canliiconnects.org › en › summariesSalomon v. Salomon, 2007 CanLII 10416 (ON SC) - CanLII Connects

   canliiconnects.org › en › summaries

   • Cached

   Nov 25, 2014 · Salomon, 2007 CanLII 10416 (ON SC) by Rosalyn Chan — UBC Law Students' Association. 0I Concur. Facts: Salomon created a corporation and sold his business to it. The business failed and the liquidator, Mr. B, claimed that the corporation was acting as an agent for S and, as principal, he should be personally liable for debts.

3. Videos

   • 

     2:53

     youtube.com

     Salomon v Salomon (Corporate personality)

     Apr 30, 2019

     27.3K Views

   • 

     9:43

     youtube.com

     Salomon v Salomon (Companies have separate legal personality)

     Mar 15, 2023

     11.3K Views

   • 

     5:10

     youtube.com

     Salomon v Salomon: The “One-Man Company”

     May 26, 2020

     63.4K Views

   View all

4. www.mondaq.com › canada › shareholdersPiercing The Corporate Veil: When Directors, Officers And ...

   www.mondaq.com › canada › shareholders

   • Cached

   Sep 9, 2014 · This legal principle has been around since the 1800s, established in the now famous English House of Lords case, Salomon v Salomon. It is not always applied by the courts, however, and there are certain circumstances where the courts will "look behind" or "lift the corporate veil" to find individuals responsible for bad company acts.

5. www.studocu.com › en-ca › documentUnit 02 Corprate law - A review of the corporate law section

   www.studocu.com › en-ca › document

   • Cached

   Case Summary 11 - “ Salomon v. Salomon & Co”: - Salomon bought his shoe manufacturing business and threw his corporation which he got a loan through. After his business failed Salomon was not responsible to pay the loan because it was received through the corporation, not him.

6. www.lawteacher.net › cases › salomon-v-salomonSalomon v Salomon - Case Summary - LawTeacher.net

   www.lawteacher.net › cases › salomon-v-salomon

   • Cached

   4 Jennings v Crown Prosecution Service, 2008 UKHL 29. 5 Marc Moore, ‘A Temple Built on Faulty Foundations: Piercing the Corporate Veil and the Legacy of Salomon v Salomon’ (2006) JBL 180. 6 1925 AC 619. 7 1961 AC 12. 8 Farrar v Farrars Ltd., (1888) 40 ChD 395.

7. lawexplores.com › the-salomon-principle-and-theThe Salomon principle and the corporate veil - lawexplores.com

   lawexplores.com › the-salomon-principle-and-the

   • Cached

   The Salomon principle and the corporate veil. As has been noted, a key feature of the company is that it is a legal person with a separate existence from the company’s members (i.e. shareholders where the company has shares) or its directors. From this separate personality flow many consequences.

8. People also ask

   What are the consequences of Salomon v a saloon & Co Ltd?

   • The consequences of Salomon v A Salomon & Co Ltd is that as a separate legal entity, separate and distinct from its shareholders, the company must be treated like any other independent persons with rights and liabilities appropriate to itself.

   THE CONSEQUENCES OF SALOMON | The Lawyers & Jurists

   www.lawyersnjurists.com/article/the-consequences-of-salomon/

   See all results for this question

   Who was liable in Salomon v saloon?

   • Salomon v. Salomon, 2007 CanLII 10416 (ON SC) Salomon v. Salomon, 2007 CanLII 10416 (ON SC) Facts: Salomon created a corporation and sold his business to it. The business failed and the liquidator, Mr. B, claimed that the corporation was acting as an agent for S and, as principal, he should be personally liable for debts.

   Salomon v. Salomon, 2007 CanLII 10416 (ON SC)

   canliiconnects.org/en/summaries/31898

   See all results for this question

   Is a share enough in Salomon v a saloon & Co Ltd?

   • Lord Halsbury LC in Salomon v A Salomon & Co Ltd said: I must pause here, to point out that the statute enacts nothing as to the extent or degree of interest which may be held by each of the seven [subscribers] or as to the proportion of influence possessed by one or the majority of the shareholders over the others. One share is enough.

   The Salomon principle and the corporate veil

   lawexplores.com/the-salomon-principle-and-the-corporate-veil/

   See all results for this question

   Was Salomon's business a sham?

   • The company’s liquidator claimed that the company’s business was still Salomon’s, in that the company was merely a sham to limit Salomon’s liability for debts incurred in carrying it on, and the repayment of Salomon’s debenture should be postponed until the company’s other creditors were satisfied.

   The Salomon principle and the corporate veil

   lawexplores.com/the-salomon-principle-and-the-corporate-veil/

   See all results for this question

   What was the decision in Salomon v Cape Industries plc?

   • While the decision in Salomon’s case has certainly been open to criticism, and the cases are far from consistent, in Adams v Cape Industries plc Ch 433, the Court of Appeal held that an English company, whose business was mining asbestos in South Africa, was not present in the United States through another member of the corporate group.

   The Salomon principle and the corporate veil

   lawexplores.com/the-salomon-principle-and-the-corporate-veil/

   See all results for this question

   What happened in the Salomon v Salomon case?

   • Here is a short video summary of the Salomon v Salomon case: Salomon transferred his business of boot making, initially run as a sole proprietorship, to a company (Salomon Ltd.), incorporated with members comprising of himself and his family.

   Salomon v Salomon - Case Summary - LawTeacher.net

   www.lawteacher.net/cases/salomon-v-salomon.php

   See all results for this question

9. www.lawyersnjurists.com › article › the-consequencesTHE CONSEQUENCES OF SALOMON | The Lawyers & Jurists

   www.lawyersnjurists.com › article › the-consequences

   • Cached

   The consequences of Salomon v A Salomon & Co Ltd [4] is that as a separate legal entity, separate and distinct from its shareholders, the company must be treated like any other independent persons with rights and liabilities appropriate to itself. In legitimising the one-man company, Salomon also legitimises the group concept with each subsidiary company being a separate and distinct entity ...