Salomon v A Salomon and Co Ltd (Salomon) has created an impressive case in English Law history. The decision of the House of Lords in Salomon has reaffirmed the separate legal personality of a company. A separate legal personality is also known as the corporate personality. It is one of the consequences of the Company Act 2006 which incorporated a sole trader company to a limited company. When a company has undergone incorporation‚ it simply means that the shareholders of the company are separated
Premium Corporation Limited liability
The arguments for abortion are not only if the fetus applies to this rule‚ but also our basic rights as humans. Some of the strongest arguments to date on either side are A Defense of Abortion by Judith Jarvis Thomson and Why Abortion is Immoral by Don Marquis. I will argue in defense of abortion using these arguments. Overview of the Argument There is many arguments against abortion. Part of them argue that the fetus is a person at the moment of conception. To that Thomson asks the question: At
Premium Abortion Human rights Pregnancy
Law 494 Part 1 Shlensky v. Wrigley Facts: William Shlensky (plaintiff/appellant)‚ minority stock holder for the Chicago Cubs baseball team sued the team directors who deferred the case to Phillip Wrigley (defendant/appellee) stating mismanagement and negligence because of the refusal of the directors in installing lights at Wrigley Field‚ home field for the Chicago Cubs. Procedural History: Plaintiff original case was lost at trial and plaintiff appealed. Issue: The issue
Premium Corporation Limited liability company
Henry V – William Shakespeare There can be little doubt that Shakespeare intended to present his protagonist in “Henry V” as the popular hero-king. His efforts are mainly concentrated on the portraiture of this “star of England”‚ King Henry‚ whom he deliberately chose out of the page of history as the finest representative of the best distinctive type of English character. He wanted his play to lead triumphantly to an English victory against overwhelming odds at Agincourt. What is not agreed among
Premium Henry VI of England Henry V of England Henry IV of England
[1893] 1 Q.B. 256 1892 WL 9612 (CA)‚ [1893] 1 Q.B. 256 (Cite as: [1893] 1 Q.B. 256) Page 1 *256 Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Company. In the Court of Appeal. CA Lindley‚ Bowen and A. L. Smith‚ L.JJ. 1892 Dec. 6‚ 7. Contract--Offer by Advertisement--Performance of Condition in Advertisement-- Notification of Acceptance of Offer--Wager--Insurance--8 & 9 Vict. c. 109-- 14 Geo. 3‚ c. 48‚ s. 2. The defendants‚ the proprietors of a medical preparation called "The Carbolic Smoke Ball‚" issued an advertisement
Premium Contract Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company Invitation to treat
Introduction Plaintiff: Bill‚ Charles & Don Defendant: Allan Allan advertised his motorcar for sale at $50‚000. Bill‚ Charles and Don came down for viewing. The entire three customers Bill‚ Charles and Don each have their own negotiating reasons with Allan. Allan did not response and remains silent. After that Eric was last person to come down for viewing the car. Liked and accepted Allan offers‚ immediately the car was sold to him. Having to hear that the car was already been sold‚ the plaintiffs
Premium Law Contract Common law
The case Brandy V Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission challenges the constitutional validity of the scheme for the enforcement of Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC) determination under the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth). The High Court of Australia had decided that since HREOC was not constituted as a court according to Chapter III of the Constitution‚ and therefore was not able to exercise judicial power of commonwealth and enforce any subsequent decisions. The
Premium Law Human rights United Kingdom
DR. RAM MANOHAR LOHIYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY‚ LUCKNOW 2012-13 FINAL DRAFT ON BIRD v JONES Under The Guidance Of: Submitted by: ( ) ( ) Mr. Shashank Shekhar Assistant Professor Roll
Premium Logic Reason Law
| | CP-24 V-BLOCK Go to CALIBRATION PROCEDURE HOME or INDEX for links to other procedures.V-BLOCKS V-Blocks are often used to check true position gages and runout in the lab. They are also used for work holding and inspection on the shop floor. In some shop work holding applications‚ the accuracy would not need to be to the level of lab or inspection gage blocks. V-blocks are precisely square‚ and the V-groove should be in the exact center of the block. The prime purpose of a V-block is to hold
Premium Angle Surface
Don Russell: Experiences of a Controller/CFO 1985: Coporate controller at C&S updated the charts of accoutns did major cost reductions was promoted to vice president intitiated a study on the strategic planning tried to convicen management to change to a chash focused planning system instead of operating income 1989 CFO at EFI Updated the budget sys. (Satellite business was unprofitable) Found out that earnings were artificially increased (e.g. by depreciating equipment longer than realistic
Premium Accountancy Fraud Finance