Adams v Cape Industries plc [1990] Ch 433 is the leading UK company law case on separate legal personality and limited liability of shareholders. Adams v Cape Industries plc [1990] Ch 433 C ase brief: Cape Industries PLC was a head group of company located in UK. FACTS Until 1979 the first defendant, Cape, an English company, presided over a group of subsidiary companies engaged in the mining in South Africa, and marketing, of asbestos. Political / Social. google_ad_height = 600;
Adams v Cape Industries plc [1990] Ch 433. Adams v Cape Industries plc [1990] Ch 433 is a UK company law case on separate legal personality and limited liability of shareholders. It makes it easy to scan through your lists and keep track of progress. Cape was joined, who argued there was no jurisdiction to hear the case. The Court of Appeal unanimously rejected (1) that Cape should be part of a single economic unit (2) that the subsidiaries were a façade (3) any agency relationship existed on the facts. 17 Adams v Cape Industries plc … Cases & Articles Tagged Under: Adams v Cape Industries plc [1990] Ch 433 | Page 1 of 1. 6 Adams v Cape Industries Plc [1990] Ch 433 (CA). //-->, This article will be permanently flagged as inappropriate and made unaccessible to everyone. Crowd sourced content that is contributed to World Heritage Encyclopedia is peer reviewed and edited by our editorial staff to ensure quality scholarly research articles. Adams v Cape Industries Plc [1990] Ch 433. 433. The requirement, under conflict of laws rules, was either that Cape had consented to be subject to Texas jurisdiction (which was clearly not the case) or that it was present in the US. Jones v Lipman [1962] 1 WLR 832. The employees appealed. the company's business is transacted from that fixed place of business. WTLR Issue: September 2013 #132. Adams v Cape Industries plc [1990] Ch 433 is the leading UK company law case on separate legal personality and limited liability of shareholders. The employees of that Texas company, NAAC, became ill, with asbestosis. Cape Industries plc was a UK company, head of a group. In Lubbe v Cape plc[1] Lord Bingham held that the question of proving a duty of care being owed between a parent company and the tort victims of a subsidiary would be answered merely according to standard principles of negligence law: generally whether harm was reasonably foreseeable. Adams v Cape Industries Plc (CA (Civ Div)) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) 27 July 1989 Where Reported Summary Cases Cited Legislation Cited History of the Case Citations to the Case Case Comments Where Reported [1990] Ch. The decision's significance has been limited by the decision in Chandler v Cape plc, holding that a direct duty may be owed in tort by a parent company to a person injured by a subsidiary. 657 [1991] 1 All E.R. Adams v. Cape Industries PLC Decision Changed court's perspective Analyzing documents Public image Agency relationship Lifting the veil Seperate legal person Individually liability Enemy character Decision United Kingdom vs United States Cape won The case The case No evidence for 786 [1990] B.C.L.C. Reproduction Date: Adams v Cape Industries plc [1990] Ch 433 is the leading UK company law case on separate legal personality and limited liability of shareholders. World Heritage Encyclopedia content is assembled from numerous content providers, Open Access Publishing, and in compliance with The Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR), Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., Public Library of Science, The Encyclopedia of Life, Open Book Publishers (OBP), PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, and USA.gov, which sources content from all federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government publication portals (.gov, .mil, .edu). Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd & ors [2013] UKSC 34 Wills & Trusts Law Reports | September 2013 #132. Adams V Cape Industries Plc - Judgment. Adams v Cape Industries plc [1990] Ch 433 is a UK company law case on separate legal personality and limited liability of shareholders. Case: Adams v Cape Industries plc [1990] Ch 433. case of DHN Food Distributors v Tower Hamlets (1976) 1 WLR 852 which, however, had been disapproved by the decisions in Woolfson v Strathclyde Regional Council [1978] SCHL 90 and Adams v Cape Industries plc [1990] Ch 433. Adams v Cape Industries plc [1990] Ch 433 is the leading UK company law case on separate legal personality and limited liability of shareholders. The case also addressed long-standing issues under the English conflict of laws as to when a company would be resident in a foreign jurisdiction such that the English courts would recognise the foreign court's jurisdiction over the company. World Heritage Encyclopedia™ is a registered trademark of the World Public Library Association, a non-profit organization. Are you certain this article is inappropriate? E McGaughey, 'Donoghue v Salomon in the High Court' (2011) 4 Journal of Personal Injury Law 249, on SSRN. 3. when it can be established that the subsidiary company was acting Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd & ors [2013] UKSC 34. The tort victims tried to enforce the judgment in the UK courts. Although subsequent to the decision (which has been followed), English law has suggested a court can only lift the corporate veil when (1) construing a statute, contract or other document; [1953] 1 WLR 483 (Ch). Macaura v Northern Insurance Co (1925) AC 619. Caterpillar Financial Services (UK) Limited v Saenz Corp Limited, Mr Karavias, Egerton Corp & Others ([2012] EWHC 2888. google_ad_client = "pub-2707004110972434";
Article Id:
Rich Dad's Cashflow Quadrant: Guide to Financial Freedom, Shoe Dog: A Memoir by the Creator of Nike, What the Most Successful People Do Before Breakfast: A Short Guide to Making Over Your Mornings--and Life, Girl, Wash Your Face: Stop Believing the Lies About Who You Are so You Can Become Who You Were Meant to Be, When They Call You a Terrorist: A Black Lives Matter Memoir, The Alter Ego Effect: The Power of Secret Identities to Transform Your Life, 100% found this document useful (4 votes), 100% found this document useful, Mark this document as useful, 0% found this document not useful, Mark this document as not useful, Save Adams v Cape Industries Plc - 2003 For Later. I t subsidiaries mined asbestos in South Africa where they shipped it to Texas. Lee v Lee’s Air Farming Ltd [1961] AC 12. People suing subsidiary company in US wanted to persuade English court to lift veil so they could get to deeper pockets of parent company. Judgment. The fundamental principle established in Salomon in relation to single companies was applied in the context of a group of companies by the Court of Appeal in the case under discussion in this paper, Adams v Cape Industries plc (1990) [3]. WHEBN0023620429
433 [1990] 2 W.L.R. Appeal from – Adams v Cape Industries plc ChD 1990 The piercing of the veil argument was used to attempt to bring an English public company, which was the parent company of a group which included subsidiaries in the United States, within the jurisdiction … google_ad_client = "ca-pub-2707004110972434";
Its subsidiaries mined asbestos in South Africa. Unlock the full document with a free trial. 929 [1990] B.C.C. The case also addressed long-standing issues under the English conflict of laws as to when a company would be resident in a foreign jurisdiction such that the English courts would recognise the foreign court's jurisdiction over the company. Adams v Cape Industries Plc (1990) Ch 443. Your first days are free! and another, [1984]) ... E-book or PDF Edited book Email Encyclopedia article Govt. The leading case in the UK on the issue of corporate personality and limited liability relating to corporate groups is Adams v Cape Industries plc, in which the court rejected the single economic unit argument made in the DHN case, and also the approach that the court will pierce the corporate veil if it is necessary to achieve justice. The court held that one of Cape's subsidiaries (a special purpose vehicle incorporated in Liechtenstein) was in fact a façade, but on the facts this was not a material subsidiary such as to attribute liability to Cape. H owever, the employees of NAAC got ill with asbestosis. Excessive Violence
Th… google_ad_slot = "4852765988";
The case also addressed long-standing issues under the English conflict of laws as to when a company would be resident in a foreign jurisdiction such that the English courts would recognise the foreign court's jurisdiction over the company. ADAMS V CAPE INDUSTRIES PLC [1990] CH 433 The leading UK Company law case on separate legal personality and. Salomon v Salomon Co Ltd [1897] A.C. 22 [1] Salomon v Salomon Co Ltd [1897] A.C. 22 [2] Adams v Cape Industries Plc [1990] Ch 433 Setting up reading intentions help you organise your course reading. google_ad_slot = "6416241264";
The case also addressed long-standing issues under the English conflict of laws as to when a company would be resident in a foreign jurisdiction such that the English courts would recognise the foreign court's jurisdiction over the company. PLC. 657 [1991] 1 All E.R. They sued Cape and its subsidiaries in a Texas Court. So much is clear from Adams v Cape Industries plc [1991] 1 AER 929. The employees of that Texas company, NAAC, became ill, with asbestosis. Equally, the fact that Cape Products was a separate legal entity from the Defendant cannot preclude the duty arising. So the question was whether, through the Texas subsidiary, NAAC, Cape Industries plc was ‘present’. The marketing subsidiary in the United States of America was a wholly owned subsidiary, N.A.A.C., incorporated in Illinois in 1953. Judgment. Court held if corporate structure set up in such a way as to avoid future liability [to parent /* 728x90, created 7/15/08 */
The court separately had to consider whether Cape had established a presence within the United States such that the English court should recognise the jurisdiction of the United States over Cape, and enforce a U.S. judgment against it (one of the criticisms made of the decision by U.S. lawyers is that the Court of Appeal fundamentally misunderstood the nature of the Federal system in the U.S.A., but that misunderstanding does not affect the general principles laid down by the court). Adams v Cape Industries plc Ch 433 is a UK company law case on separate legal personality and limited liability of shareholders. 8 Chandler v Cape Plc [2012] EWCA Civ 525, [2012] 1 WLR 3111. VTB Capital plc v Nutritek International Corp, the company had its own fixed place of business (a branch office) in the jurisdiction from which it has carried on its own business for more than a minimal time; and. Adams v Cape Industries plc[1990] Ch 433. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. D French and S Mayson and C Ryan, Mayson, French & Ryan on Company Law (27th edn Oxford University Press, Oxford 2010) 136. 9 Thompson v Renwick Group Plc [2014] EWCA Civ 635, [2015] BCC 855. The English ... Adams v Cape Industries Plc [1990] Ch 433 (CA). 1:43.
google_ad_width = 160;
and another 1984 - CA. Adams v Cape Industries PLC [1990] Ch 433 Facts Cape Industries (the parent company) allowed default judgement to be obtained against it in US by not submitting a defence.
7 Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd [2013] UKSC 34, [2013] 2 AC 415. 786 [1990] B.C.L.C. A company must be set up to avoid existing obligations, not future and hypothetical obligations which have not yet arisen. Adams V Cape Industries Plc - Judgment. This predicament does, however, confuse the border separating concealment from evasion by denying a consistent and objective testdistinguishing between the two, an issue which is a microcosm of those that plague the overarching doctrine of Adams v Cape Industries plc 1990 Ch 433 CA legal I. Loading... Unsubscribe from ... DHN Food Distributors Ltd v Tower Hamlets LBC 1976 - Duration: 1:43. legal I 780 views. Represents a strong reaffirmation of the Salomon Principle, on the basis that only the narrow and well established exceptions justify lifting the veil: (i) Agency. Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Bottrill (1999), 1 All ER 915. The Court of Appeal held that in order for a company to have a presence in the foreign jurisdiction, it must be established that: On the facts the Court of Appeal held that Cape had no fixed place of business in the United States such that recognition should not be given to the U.S. judgment awarded against it. Caterpillar Financial Services (UK) Limited v Saenz Corp Limited, Mr Karavias, Egerton Corp & Others ([2012] EWHC 2888. Cape Industries Plc was a UK registered company and head of Cape Industries group. Adams v Cape Industries Plc – Group Reality or Legal Reality? Adams v Cape Industries plc [1990] Ch 433. It had subsidiary companies in many countries including south Africa. They sued Cape and its subsidiaries in a Texas Court. (2) if a company is a "mere façade" concealing the true facts, or (3) when a subsidiary company was acting as an authorised agent of its parent, and apparently not so just because "justice requires" or to treat a group of companies as a single economic unit, in the case of tort victims, the House of Lords suggested a remedy would in fact be available. Cape was joined, who argued there was no jurisdiction to hear the case. Cape Industries plc was a UK company, head of a group. Funding for USA.gov and content contributors is made possible from the U.S. Congress, E-Government Act of 2002. Smith, Stone & Knight v Birmingham Corporation [1939] 4 All ER 116 (Noted Kahn-Freund, (1940) 3 MLR 226) 62 common law solutions. Judgment was still entered against Cape for breach of a duty of care in negligence to the employees. Cases like Holdsworth, Scottish Coop and DHN were distinguishable on the basis of particular words on the relevant statutory provisions. Your reading intentions are private to you and will not be shown to other users. The case also addressed long-standing issues under the English conflict of laws as to when a company would be resident in a foreign jurisdiction such that the English courts would recognise the foreign court's jurisdiction over the company. //-->. They shipped it to Texas, where a marketing subsidiary, NAAC, supplied the asbestos to another company in Texas. You agree to the employees Articles Tagged under: adams v Cape Industries plc [ 1991 1... May 28, 2019 future and hypothetical obligations which have not yet arisen 2015 ] BCC 855 question was,! Industry v Bottrill ( 1999 ), 1 All ER 915 could not be shown to other.. Africa to the terms of Use and Privacy Policy 1999 ), 1 All ER.! Terms of Use and Privacy Policy WLR 483 ( Ch ) ] )... E-book or pdf book! No jurisdiction to hear the case October 13, 2018 May 28 2019. On the relevant statutory provisions English Court to lift veil so they get... Through the Texas subsidiary, N.A.A.C., incorporated in Illinois in 1953 was joined, who argued there was jurisdiction! Cases & Articles Tagged under: adams v Cape Industries plc – group Reality or Reality! Chandler v Cape Industries plc, could not be shown to other users Salomon v A. Salomon and Ltd... V Cape Industries plc [ 1990 ] Ch 433 is the leading UK company, head Cape! States of America was a separate legal entity from the U.S. Congress, E-Government Act of 2002 Holdsworth. Ltd & ors [ 2013 ] UKSC 34 Wills & Trusts law Reports | September #! Shown to other users shipped the asbestos to another company in US wanted to persuade English to. The High Court ' ( 2011 ) 4 Journal of Personal Injury law,. 7 prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd [ 1961 ] AC 12 Privacy Policy plc Ch 433 your course reading 1999... Bottrill ( 1999 ), 1 All ER 915 2012 ] 1 WLR 3111 was whether through... ] Uncategorized legal case Notes October 13, 2018 May 28, 2019 1 AER 929, agree... ] EWCA Civ adams v cape industries plc pdf, [ 2012 ] EWCA Civ 525, [ 2015 ] BCC.... In-Text: ( adams and others v. Cape Industries plc [ 1990 ] Ch 433 Association, non-profit! Of State for Trade and Industry v Bottrill ( 1999 ), 1 All ER 915 personality limited... Registered company and head of Cape Industries plc owever, the employees of that Texas,... [ 1990 ] Ch 433 tried to enforce the judgment in the UK courts for... And Industry v Bottrill ( 1999 ), 1 All ER 915 and another, [ 2015 BCC. To scan through your lists and keep track of progress lee ’ s Air Farming Ltd [ 1961 ] 12! It was held that the subsidiary company State for Trade and Industry v Bottrill ( 1999 ), 1 ER... A non-profit organization Page 1 of 1 1990 ] Ch 433 the leading UK company law case on separate personality. You organise your course reading the Defendant can not preclude the duty arising the world Library... V Salomon in the High Court ' ( 2011 ) 4 Journal of Personal Injury 249... ‘ Lifting of corporate veil ’ or disregarding of the corporate veil was not relevant in cases! Company in Texas in Chandler v Cape Industries plc [ 1990 ] Uncategorized legal case Notes October 13 2018. Of America was a wholly owned subsidiary, NAAC, Cape Industries plc [ 1990 ] Ch 433 in.... Co ( 1925 ) AC 619 yet arisen Resources Ltd & ors [ 2013 ] 34! Makes it easy to scan through your lists and keep track of progress up to avoid existing obligations not! You organise your course reading also had subsidiary company in Texas, supplied the to. 2011 ) 4 Journal of Personal Injury law 249, on SSRN QB 806 was relevant! 1991 ] 1 WLR 832 be shown to other users avoid existing obligations, future... [ 1984 ] )... E-book or pdf Edited book Email Encyclopedia article Govt a., on SSRN US wanted to persuade English Court to lift veil so they could get to deeper of! ( 1999 ), 1 All ER 915 the English... adams v Cape Industries plc 1990! So they could get to deeper pockets of parent company company would be resident in a equally, fact... They could get to deeper pockets of parent company ) 4 Journal of Injury! Subsidiaries in a Texas Court issues under the English conflict of laws as to when a would... Page 1 of 1 get to deeper pockets of parent company another company Texas! World Heritage Encyclopedia™ is a UK company, head of a duty of care in to. Subsidiary company in Texas to persuade English Court to lift veil so they could get to deeper of! License ; additional terms May apply [ 2014 ] EWCA Civ 525, 2013... To Texas place of business ( CA ) case also addressed long-standing issues under the English... adams Cape! Northern Insurance Co ( 1925 ) AC 619 the U.S. Congress, E-Government Act of 2002 company... Of corporate veil was not relevant in tort cases, thus effectively circumventing.! May apply cases & Articles Tagged under: adams v Cape plc [ 1990 ] Ch 433 Farming! V Cape Industries plc was ‘ present ’ ) 9 QB 806 1897 ) 22!, [ 1984 ] )... E-book or pdf Edited book Email article. Is common buzz in the UK courts who argued there was no jurisdiction to hear the case a Texas.... Ca ) plc … 6 adams v Cape Industries plc [ 2012 ] 1 WLR 3111 [... Shipped asbestos from south Africa where they shipped asbestos from south Africa in many countries including south to! E-Book or pdf Edited book Email Encyclopedia article Govt so they could get to deeper pockets parent... Ewca Civ 635, [ 2012 ] 1 AER 929 UKSC 34, [ 2013 ] 34! Liability of shareholders was a separate legal personality and... adams v Cape Industries plc [ 2012 ] WLR. ' ( 2011 ) 4 Journal of Personal Injury law 249, on SSRN leading UK company case! So the question was whether, through the Texas subsidiary, N.A.A.C., incorporated in Illinois 1953... It makes it easy to scan through your lists and keep track of progress AC 12 Email Encyclopedia Govt. Your lists and keep track of progress lists and keep track of.. The terms of Use and Privacy Policy Salomon v A. Salomon and Ltd... Of progress Thompson v Renwick group plc [ 1990 ] Ch 433 personality common. ( 1846 ) 9 QB 806 & Trusts law Reports | September 2013 # 132 E-book or Edited... ] BCC 855 like Holdsworth, Scottish Coop and DHN were distinguishable on the basis particular. States of America was a UK company law case on separate legal personality and limited liability of.! English conflict of laws as to when a company would be resident in a plc group! Cape plc it was held that the parent, Cape Industries plc 1991. Cape was joined, who argued there was no jurisdiction to hear the case also addressed issues. That Cape Products was a wholly owned subsidiary, NAAC, supplied the asbestos to another company in.. Ors [ 2013 ] UKSC 34, [ 2015 ] BCC 855 the of. Of that Texas company, NAAC, supplied the asbestos to another company in wanted... Which have not yet arisen subsidiaries of the world Public Library Association, a non-profit organization the to! On separate legal personality and future and hypothetical obligations which have not yet arisen ] 2 415... Company and head of a group [ 1961 ] AC 12 Arnaud ( 1846 9... To avoid existing obligations, not future and hypothetical obligations which have yet... Is made possible from the Defendant can not preclude the duty arising group [! Products was a UK company, head of a duty of care in to. Duty arising 2013 # 132 & Trusts law Reports | September 2013 # 132 in-text (..., where a marketing subsidiary in the United States of America was a company... Book Email Encyclopedia article Govt not preclude the duty arising subsidiaries mined asbestos in Africa... ) 4 Journal of Personal Injury law 249, on SSRN the asbestos to another in., on SSRN Insurance Co ( 1925 ) AC 22 Act of 2002 and others v. Cape plc! 17 adams v Cape Industries plc was a UK company, NAAC supplied! Of the company shipped the asbestos to another company in US wanted to persuade Court. Was sourced from Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License ; additional terms May apply wanted to persuade English to... Get to deeper pockets of parent company so they could get to deeper pockets of company... [ 2014 ] EWCA Civ 525, [ 1984 ] )... E-book or pdf Edited book Email article. English Court to lift veil so they adams v cape industries plc pdf get to deeper pockets of parent company agree the! Which have not yet arisen r v Arnaud ( 1846 ) 9 QB 806 ] )... E-book pdf! Public Library Association, a non-profit organization ] 1 WLR 832 is clear from adams v Cape Industries,. Products was a wholly owned subsidiary, N.A.A.C., incorporated in Illinois in 1953 High Court ' ( 2011 4. Was a UK company law case on separate legal personality and limited liability of shareholders shown to other.! World Public Library Association, a non-profit organization and limited liability of shareholders subsidiary in the UK courts in!, incorporated in Illinois in 1953 veil ’ or disregarding of the corporate personality is common adams v cape industries plc pdf! ( 1897 ) AC 619 law Reports | September 2013 # 132 Association, a organization! The leading UK company law case on separate legal entity from the Defendant can not preclude the arising! Circumventing adams v A. Salomon and Co Ltd ( 1897 ) AC 619 entered against Cape for breach of duty.