Jones v Lipman
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 1962 |
| Date | 1962 |
| Year | 1962 |
| Court | Chancery Division |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
143 cases
- Yukong Line Ltd of Korea v Rendsburg Investments Corporation of Liberia (The Rialto) (Mareva Proceedings)
- Lim Sung Huak and Others v Sykt Pemaju Tanah Tikam Batu Sdn Bhd
- JH Rayner (Mincing Lane) Ltd and Others v Manilal & Sons (M) Sdn Bhd and Another
-
Dave Persad v Anirudh Singh (Trinidad and Tobago)
...Mr Beharrylal suggested that the facts of this case were comparable with those in Gilford Motor Co Ltd v Horne [1933] Ch 935 and Jones v Lipman [1962] 1 WLR 832, whose facts are respectively set out by Lord Sumption in Prest at paras 29 and 30. The Board considers that those cases are rea......
Request a trial to view additional results
3 firm's commentaries
-
Assumption of Direct Responsibility for a Subsidiary's Liabilities – Is the Corporate Limited Liability Veil in Tatters?
...pierce the corporate veil as a decision to ignore privity of contract ... Neither in Gilford v Horne [1933] Ch 935 nor in Jones v Lipman [1962] 1 WLR 832 were damages awarded against the puppet for breach of the puppeteer's contract. Rather, equitable relief was granted against the puppet t......
-
Business Rates Mitigation Schemes The Court Of Appeal Refuses To 'Pierce The Corporate Veil'
...per the Supreme Court in Prest v. Petrodel Resources Ltd [2013] UKSC 34); and the "evasion principle" demonstrated in Jones v. Lipman [1962] 1 WLR 832, where a legal right against the person in control of the company exists, independent of that company's involvement, and the company is impo......
-
Business rates mitigation schemes – The Court of Appeal refuses to
...per the Supreme Court in Prest v. Petrodel Resources Ltd [2013] UKSC 34); and the "evasion principle" demonstrated in Jones v. Lipman [1962] 1 WLR 832, where a legal right against the person in control of the company exists, independent of that company's involvement, and the company is impo......
12 books & journal articles
-
Table of Cases
...Ltd v Ruparelia [2003] EWCA Civ 1057, [2004] Lloyds Rep PN 4, [2003] 37 LS Gaz R 34, 147 Sol Jo LB 905 82, 83, 88 Jones v Lipman [1962] 1 WLR 832, [1962] 1 All ER 442, 106 Sol Jo 531, ChD 47 Joyce v Morissey [1999] EMLR 233, [1998] 47 LS Gaz R 29, [1998] All ER (D) 556, CA 103 KapHag Rendit......
-
REVISITING THE ALTER EGO EXCEPTION IN CORPORATE VEIL PIERCING
...years” from 1966 to 1989; and “back to basics” from 1989 onwards. The classical veil-lifting years involved cases such as Jones v Lipman[1962] 1 WLR 832 and Gilford v Horne[1933] Ch 935 where the courts were slow to intervene. During the interventionist years, the courts were more ready to ......
-
James Hardie and the Development of Parent Company Liability: New Zealand as a Forum for Transnational Human Rights Litigation?
...Watson, Lynne Taylor (eds) Corporate Law in New Zealand (Thomson Reuters, Wellington, New Zealand, 2018) at 4.6–4.7; and Jones v Lipman [1962] 1 WLR 832 at 836 per Russell J. 10 Watson, above n 9, at 4.6.3. 11 At 4.6.4. 80 [Vol 28, 2021] or all shares in its subsidiaries. 12 However, in New......
-
VEIL PEEKING: THE CORPORATION AS A NEXUS FOR REGULATION.
...271(c) (2005). (304) For the U.K. law precedents, see, for example, Gilford Motor Co., Ltd. v. Home [1933] Ch 935 and/ones v. Lipman [1962] 1 All ER 442. (305) Jones, [1962] 1 All ER at 442-44. (306) Id. at 445. (307) See, e.g., T.J.S.R, Apelacao Civel No. 0217635-30.2011.8.26.0000, Relator......
Request a trial to view additional results