新西兰科罗曼德尔论文代写：公司法
当讨论Macaura诉的情况下保证有限公司北部(1925)使用了有限责任的概念,公司的资产和债务属于公司而不是企业个性。当讨论所罗门情况下,单独的法律实体可以被看作是一个双面的剑。这种情况下担任公司积极和消极的影响。这个例子将使用整个情况所以亨利和马克先生可以受益后看过去的不同情况。
起重面纱解释了情况下,立法机关决定人格分离的公司不是维护。分离还包括组织的成员。根据公司的面纱一旦注册完成创建新的法律责任,实施新法人责任不同于那些成员。在这个组织的成员是阻止负责对公司的负债(罗奇,2014)。这是出现在所罗门Vs所罗门和Co ltd .)的情况。创建本公司根据公司法和被称为作为一个单独的实体,所罗门先生代理工作。公司借来的钱,偿还担保债权人的责任。这种情况下以提升公司的面纱。在这种情况下,法院准备忽视公司的面纱,给组织的成员的责任支付公司的债务。
新西兰科罗曼德尔论文代写：公司法
When discussing about the case of Macaura v. Northern Assurance Co. (1925) the limited liability concept was used and assets of the company and debts belonged to the corporation not the corporate personality. When discussing about Salomon case, separate legal entity can be viewed as a two edged sword. This case served as positive and negative consequences on the corporation. This example will be used throughout the case so Mr. Henry and Mark can be benefited after looking at different cases of the past.
Lifting the veil explains the situations in which the legislature decides that separation of the personality of the company is not maintained. The separation also includes members of the organization. According to the veil of incorporation once the registration is complete the new legal liabilities are created that impose a new legal person that has liabilities different from those of the members. In this the members of the organization are prevented from being responsible about the liabilities of the company (Roach, 2014). This was present in the Salomon Vs Salomon and Co Ltd. case. This company was created according to the companies act and was termed as a separate entity in which Mr. Salomon was working as an agent. The company borrowed money and was liable to pay it back to the secured creditors. This case was famous for lifting the veil of incorporation. After this case the courts are prepared to ignore the veil of incorporation and give responsibilities to the members of the organization to pay the debts of the company.