Theories of Corporate Personality
Theories of Corporate Personality
MANAS AGARWAL
5th Semester BA LL.B (B)
School of Law
Christ University
Bangalore
INDEX
* Research Methodology * Introduction * The Common Law Perspectives * Fiction Theory * Concession Theory * The Purpose Theory * Bracket Theory * Realist Theory * Why Corporations? * Corporate Personality And Limited Liability
Cases:
* Macaura v. Northern Assurance Co. * Lee v. Lee’s Air Farming * Salomon v. Salomon & Co.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I Manas Agarwal of B.A.LL.B (Hons.) is really grateful to Ms. Fincy V, without whose help and corporation this project would not have been possible. I am also grateful to the National Law School India University (N.L.S.I.U) Library staff and the Knowledge Centre, Christ University staff, whose cooperation is appreciable. I think this kind of assignments lead to the overall development of the students and I am looking forward to take up such assignments in future.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
• SCOPE AND FOCUS: -
This research paper essentially seeks to study and criticise the different theories of corporate personality considering the jurisprudential conflicts.
• RESEARCH OBJECTIVES: - * The principal objective of our research is to study and criticise the different theories of corporate personality and the concepts under it. * Another objective of our research is to find conflicts between the various theories relying on various judgments.
• RESEARCH QUESTIONS: - * What is the difference between various theories of corporate personalities. * The meaning and limits of a corporate personality.
• METHOD OF ANALYSIS: -
This project has its basis on the following methods of analysis:-
DESCRIPTIVE: -
The first task is to comprehensively study and critize the jurisprudential theories of corporate personalities.
ANALYTICAL: -
Further these concepts and observations can be analyzed. The valuable knowledge that is gained
MANAS AGARWAL
5th Semester BA LL.B (B)
School of Law
Christ University
Bangalore
INDEX
* Research Methodology * Introduction * The Common Law Perspectives * Fiction Theory * Concession Theory * The Purpose Theory * Bracket Theory * Realist Theory * Why Corporations? * Corporate Personality And Limited Liability
Cases:
* Macaura v. Northern Assurance Co. * Lee v. Lee’s Air Farming * Salomon v. Salomon & Co.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I Manas Agarwal of B.A.LL.B (Hons.) is really grateful to Ms. Fincy V, without whose help and corporation this project would not have been possible. I am also grateful to the National Law School India University (N.L.S.I.U) Library staff and the Knowledge Centre, Christ University staff, whose cooperation is appreciable. I think this kind of assignments lead to the overall development of the students and I am looking forward to take up such assignments in future.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
• SCOPE AND FOCUS: -
This research paper essentially seeks to study and criticise the different theories of corporate personality considering the jurisprudential conflicts.
• RESEARCH OBJECTIVES: - * The principal objective of our research is to study and criticise the different theories of corporate personality and the concepts under it. * Another objective of our research is to find conflicts between the various theories relying on various judgments.
• RESEARCH QUESTIONS: - * What is the difference between various theories of corporate personalities. * The meaning and limits of a corporate personality.
• METHOD OF ANALYSIS: -
This project has its basis on the following methods of analysis:-
DESCRIPTIVE: -
The first task is to comprehensively study and critize the jurisprudential theories of corporate personalities.
ANALYTICAL: -
Further these concepts and observations can be analyzed. The valuable knowledge that is gained
Bibliography: [ 2 ]. Stokes, M. "Company Law and Legal Theory" in Twining, W. (ed). Legal Theory and the Common Law. Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1986, 155, 162. [ 5 ]. Mark, G. Op. cit. 1472. [ 6 ]. cf. Mills v Mills (1938) 60 CLR 150 [ 7 ] [ 8 ]. Dan-Cohen, M. Rights, Persons, and Organizations. University of California Press, Berkeley, 1986, 5.