Preview

Legal Assignment

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1776 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Legal Assignment
LEGT 2741 MAJOR ASSIGNMENT
The chances of successfully enforcing the contractual agreement between Casino Ltd. and its employees depends upon the issues raised, the rules and subsequent applications that could be established by the trade union against Casino Ltd.
-------------------------------------------------
Issues 1. Whether Casino Ltd. (the parent company) and Caterers Ltd. (its wholly-owned subsidiary company) are considered as separate legal entities. Additionally, whether the concept of corporate veil applies to the corporate groups (between Casino Ltd and Caterers Ltd). 2. Is it possible to lift or pierce the corporate veil of corporate groups on the basis that: (a) there is an implied agency relationship between the companies in the group? (b) the subsidiary company is incorporated to avoid a contractual obligation? 3. Has the company breached Section 596 of the Corporations Act?
-------------------------------------------------
Rules 1. The Salomon case establishes that an incorporated company is a separate legal entity from its participants, namely founders, shareholders, directors, employees and agents. Consequently, a company could enter into contracts in its own rights and possess assets and liabilities distinct from its members. In legal terminology, this rule is referred to as the ‘corporate veil’.
According to the Walker case at 6 per Justice Mason, a corporate group is “a number of companies associated by common or interlocking shareholdings, allied to unified control or capacity to control.” Accordingly, Lord Justice Roskill in Albazeo case observed:
“… each company in a group of companies … is a separate legal entity possessed of separate legal rights and liabilities … the existence of those principles . … is impossible to deny, ignore or disobey ...” 2. (a) When an agency relationship exists in the corporate groups, the corporate veil could be pierced. Piercing the corporate veil is a judicially



Bibliography: Australian Corporations Legislation, 2010, LexisNexis/Butterworths Harris J, Hargovan A and Adams M, Australian Corporate Law, 2nd edition, 2009, LexisNexis/Butterworths. Ramsay and Noakes, “Piercing the Corporate Veil in Australia” (2001) 19 Companies and Securities Law Journal 250. Hargovan, A and Harris, J “The Relevance of Control in Establishing an Implied Agency Relationship between a Company and its Owners” (2005) 23 Companies and Securities Law Journal 461-466 [electronic source]. http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/wa/WASCA/2002/107.html?stem=0&synonyms=0&query=title%28Australian%20Liquor%20%20and%20%20Burswood%20Catering%20 (accessed on 9th April 2010) -------------------------------------------- [ 2 ]. Walker v Wimborne (1976) 137 CLR1. [ 4 ]. Ramsay and Noakes, “Piercing the Corporate Veil in Australia” (2001) 19 Companies and Securities Law Journal 250 at 251. [ 8 ]. Australian Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union, Western Australia Branch v Burswood Catering and Entertainment Pty Ltd (2002) 82 WAIG 544. [ 12 ]. Burswood Catering and Entertainment Pty Ltd v Australian Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union, Western Australian Branch [2002] WASCA 107 (23 April 2002) para 4.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    HCC 40, PC 3: Court Case

    • 745 Words
    • 3 Pages

    . Issue : Can the court pierce the corporate veil to reach Carlton individually ?…

    • 745 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Gahsa Rjewrj Wv

    • 833 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Piercing the corporate veil or lifting the corporate veil is a legal decision to treat the rights or duties of a corporation as the rights or liabilities of its shareholders. Usually a corporation is treated as a separate legal person, which is solely responsible for the debts it incurs and the sole beneficiary of the credit it is owed.…

    • 833 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Legt 2741 Assignment

    • 1787 Words
    • 8 Pages

    However, the precedent in the Saloman Case is not gospel and the ‘corporate veil’ can be lifted in certain circumstances . If the company is used:…

    • 1787 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Redmond, P., Companies and Securities Law - Commentary and Materials, Law Book Co., Sydney, 5th, 2009.…

    • 1621 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Best Essays

    Radan, P & Stewart, C, Principles of Australian Equity & Trusts, (2010), LexisNexis Australia, Chatswood…

    • 3483 Words
    • 14 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    nvq level 2

    • 337 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Usually disease can be contracted through air or fluids. Through human to human it is more often airborne than fluid borne.…

    • 337 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    | AUSTRALIAN SECURITIES AND INVESTMENTS COMMISSION v BRIAN HEALEY, ANDREW THOMAS SCOTT, SAMUEL KAVOURAKIS, JAMES WILLIAM HALL, PAUL ASHLEY COOPER, PETER GRAHAM GOLDIE, LOUIS PETER WILKINSON and ROMANO GEORGE NENNA…

    • 4945 Words
    • 20 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Case Study-James Hardie

    • 435 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Piercing the corporate veil describes a legal decision to treat the rights or duties of a corporation as the rights or liabilities of its shareholders or directors. Usually a corporation is treated as a separate legal person, which is solely responsible for the debts it incurs and the sole beneficiary of the credit it is owed. Common law countries usually uphold this principle of separate personhood, but in exceptional situations may "pierce" or "lift" the corporate veil. A simple example would be where a businessman has left his job as a director and has signed a contract to not compete with the company he has just left for a period of time. If he set up a company which competed with his former company, technically it would be the company and not the person competing. But it is likely a court would say that the new company was just a "sham", a "fraud" or some other phrase,[1] and would still allow the old company to sue the man for breach of contract. A court would look beyond the "legal fiction" to the reality of the situation.…

    • 435 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    eng rwryw efhe gw gweth

    • 841 Words
    • 4 Pages

    CLR 447
 Handley v Snoid (1981) 4 TPR 361 
Johnson v Buttress (1936) 56 CLR 113
 Astley v Austrust (1999) 161 ALR 155
G. H. Myers v Brent Cross Service Co. (1934) 1 KB 46 Australian Knitting Mills Ltd v Grant (1936) 50 CLR 387 Beale v Taylor (1967) 1 WLR 1193 
Qanstruct Pty Ltd v Bongiorno Ltd (1993) 113 ALR 667 Director of Consumer Affairs of Victoria v AAPT Ltd…

    • 841 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Insider trading is defined as “ trading whilst in possession of non-public information and if known to the public, may lead to a substantial movement in a security’s price” . In Australia it is prohibited by insider trading regulation (IT regulations) in the Corporations Law (CL) 1991 , though it was initially established from recommendations made by the Rae committee in 1974 on the mining company scandals . The latest law changed one single section to 20 wide and complex sections, causing critique of Australia IT regulations . Henry G Manne argued that IT regulations should be abolished supported by three basic economic arguments. This essay will examine the pro and contra of each argument and shows that IT regulations have spoiled the notion of fairness at the expense of efficiency, despite the objective of any securities markets regulation to promote both aspects .…

    • 1669 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Work Choices Case

    • 4012 Words
    • 17 Pages

    New South Wales v Brewery Employés Union of New South Wales (1908) 6 CLR 469…

    • 4012 Words
    • 17 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The House of Lords in Salomon v Salomon1 affirmed the legal principle that, upon incorporation, a company is generally considered to be a new legal entity separate from its shareholders. The court did this in relation to what was essentially a one person company. Windeyer J, in the High Court in Peate v Federal Commissioner of Taxation,2 stated that a company represents:…

    • 15226 Words
    • 61 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Farm Girl

    • 360 Words
    • 2 Pages

    As I was reading the story “Farm Girl”, I realized that the author Jessica Hemauer wrote an essay to let people know they can never forget where they come from. Some people may have to work harder than others to get what they want; but it can happen. Yes, we are all different and it is okay.…

    • 360 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Drug Dilemmas

    • 521 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Go to pages 202-203 to read about "Corporate Moral Agency" and the 2010 Supreme Court ruling giving corporations First Amendment rights. As you know, the First Amendment gives us, among other rights, the freedom of speech. Although corporations had limited “personhood” rights prior to the 2010 decision, now they have rights indistinguishable from individual citizens. Justice Roberts believes that “a corporation, just like an individual, has many diverse interests…indistinguishable from the individual who owns them.”…

    • 521 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Best Essays

    [vi] ASX Corporate Governance Council. 2007. Corporate Governance Codes and Principles – Australia. http://www.ecgi.org/codes/documents/corp_governance_principles_asx_2007.pdf.(access on February 14, 2011)…

    • 1236 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Best Essays