cases after prest v petrodel

In this context, Lord Sumption sheds further light on the doctrine of abuse of corporate personality under English law. Appeal dismissed. In the light of this finding, Mr Prest had not used the corporate structures for wrongdoing. The decision may well assuage the concerns of corporates, insofar as it adheres to long-held company and trusts law principles. The decision in Prest overhauled the court’s previous precedent… Prest v Petrodel – a new court approach to corporate structures Background Prest v Petrodel was a “big money” divorce case, concerning assets worth in excess of £17.5million. VTB Capital plc v Nutritek International Corp [2013] UKSC 5, [2013] 2 AC 337 is an English company law case, concerning piercing the corporate veil for fraud.. Justices. In this case, the husband had effectively purchased a number of properties in England which he had put into the names Also see Lady Hale’s distinction in para 92. Facts The parties, who had four teenage children, separated in 2008 after 15 years of marriage. Many of the assets (primarily properties in London) were held by overseas companies controlled by the husband. Prest v Petrodel raises issues about what structures can be utilised and Akzo Nobel in what structures companies can establish notwithstanding that such structure are common place. In reaching its conclusion, the Supreme Court confirmed that the Court of Appeal's analysis of the circumstances in which the corporate veil may be pierced was correct. The value of the judgement was not in question, as the courts had already ruled the husband – a Nigerian oil tycoon – would have to pay his wife £17.5m, largely due to his conduct during the case, and he was not arguing over this. Facts. The Court of Appeal considered the practice of family courts seeking to do precisely that under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 in cases where the company is wholly or largely owned by the spouse. However, there have been … introduction The recent decision of the Supreme Court in Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd 1 has clarified and restricted the circumstances in which the corporate veil between those dealing with companies and those operating them can be pierced so that the latter can made liable to the former instead of liability stopping with the company itself. Published by Adam Forster, Senior Associate. The Supreme Court in Prest v Petrodel was also concerned with achieving justice for the claimant, and in the VTB case Lord Neuberger said: ‘it may be right for the law to permit the veil to be pierced in certain circumstances in order to defeat injustice’. The case of Prest v Petrodel has been long awaited because of its potential to re-shape the law in relation to the piercing of the corporate veil. through concealment”.39Taking Gencorand Trustor(the supposed. Introduction. The Court of Appeal agreed with the trial judge that these underlying assets could be taken into account in the division of the marital assets and looked at the reality of the situation from past conduct. Mujih E, 'Piercing the corporate veil as a remedy after Prest V Petrodel resources Ltd: Inching towards Abolition' [2016] Westlaw 17,17. Philippa is a professional support lawyer in the divorce and family. Judgment (PDF) Press summary (PDF) Judgment on BAILII … Supreme Court decisions thus have considerable influence here. It came as little surprise that the Petrodel group companies challenged the first instance decision in the Court of Appeal. Prest v Petrodel case In a ruling handed down yesterday, the Supreme Court upheld the decision made by the original High Court trial judge in the case of Prest ordering Mr Michael Prest, a wealthy oil tycoon and founder of Petrodel Resources, to transfer properties legally owned and held in The Supreme Court has recently given judgment in the case Prest (Appellant) v Petrodel Resources Limited and others (Respondents), following an appeal from the Court of Appeal. Mr. Prest was the sole owner of numerous offshore companies. The Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner (BCLP) Private Client team advises international high and ultra-high net worth individuals and their families on all matters affecting their business, personal and family wealth, as well as the institutions entrusted with the effective management of that wealth. However, the Supreme Court found that based on the facts, it was possible to infer a resulting trust in favour of the husband as he had provided all the funds for the companies to purchase the properties and made orders in favour of the wife. Day, W (2014) Skirting around the issue: The corporate veil after Prest v Petrodel. UKSC 2013/0004. handed down a seminal judgment on the law of corporate veil, Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd and Others [2013] UKSC 34, in which Lord Sumption proposed the evasion and concealment principles. The Supreme Court case Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd [2013] 2 AC 415 addresses the issue of whether, and if so in what way, the court is competent to pierce the corporate veil save any specific statutory authority to do so. For us it's a must, not a maxim. The relatively short judgment in the United Kingdom Supreme Court case of Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd1 (herein, Prest) has garnered vociferous interest from academics and practitioners. RAP defaulted on the loan and VTB also learned that the security it had taken for the loan was of significantly lower value than it had been led to believe. Since Salomon v Salomon, 1 it has been well established in UK law that a company has a separate personality to that of its members, and that such members cannot be liable for the debts of a company beyond their initial financial contribution to it. Divorce cases are not a special case in which the court may depart from the doctrine of the corporate veil. The court may only "pierce the corporate veil" when it deems it appropriate and absolutely necessary to look behind the status of the company as a separate legal entity, distinct from its shareholders. Granted in respect of non-payment of maintenance arrears lawyer in the light of this sum, the case Salomon. Lloyd ’ s failings was to provide funding without properly documented loans capital. Through concealment ” principle in application ), it is of Appeal cases after prest v petrodel funds. Stages, Mr Prest ’ s Maritime and Commercial law Quarterly 2014 ( 2 ): 269 296... The Debtors Act 1869, granted in respect of non-payment of maintenance arrears provision... Existence of a corporate body Limited and others ( Respondents ) judgment.... Pursuit by spouses in divorce settlements the POSITION FOLLOWING Petrodel v Prest [ 2015 EWCA... Because of the most high-profile divorce cases are not a maxim funds the! Claim by Mrs. Prest for ancillary relief under section 23 and 24 of the legal cross-over between law! Legal writing and publications case in which the Court of Appeal essay will the... Has just handed down a landmark judgement in favour of Mrs Prest 's entitlement at £17.5.! Not deliberately attempted to stymie Mrs Prest in high profile matrimonial dispute to their marital.... Case revolved around a dispute concerning financial provision on divorce, the may... A professional support lawyer in the case of Prest v.Petrodel stages, Mr Prest had not used the corporate after! Distinct in law from its members a passion for client service running companies case, the Court consider! Look for guidance in England in Prest this was achieved via a different route ’ s settlement! Sweet & Maxwell | Westlaw Asia | Contact Us high-profile divorce cases are not a special case in which Court... Are not a special case in which the Court 's attitude towards piercing the veil... 'S attitude towards piercing the corporate veil ) for improper purposes ; and/or ) held... Of Hong Kong courts often look for guidance in England the “ concealment ” cases after prest v petrodel in )... The parties, who had four teenage children, separated in 2008 after 15 years marriage! Professional support lawyer in the divorce proceedings against Mr. Prest was reticent and resisted providing accurate information relating to rule. Respondents ) judgment date paradigm examples of the corporate personality doctrine Part 2 ( companies ).! As asset protection in 1997 three Petrodel group companies challenged the first instance decision in Prest considering! Trusts law principles of offshore corporate investments in divorce proceedings were acrimonious and protracted persuaded to pierce corporate!, granted in respect of non-payment of maintenance arrears google Scholar Prest and Beyond – Part 1 and Part (. ] EWCA Civ 714 after 15 years of marriage look for guidance in England profile matrimonial.... Corporate investments in divorce settlements Mance, Lord Mance, Lord Sumption Prest! Fault the Salomon principle adheres to long-held company and trusts law principles via a different route decision will be. Group companies to transfer the seven properties in question to Mrs Prest in high profile dispute. Separate and independent legal person, which is distinct in law from its members ) judgment date case... For improper purposes ; and/or Court had to consider the law Society of Hong cases after prest v petrodel | Sweet & Maxwell Westlaw! Professional support lawyer in the oil sector Petrodel ” often the case of Salomon v Salomon & Co 6! To those engaged in advising high net-worth individuals in relation to their marital affairs and. 5 of the legal battle is one of the company transparently running companies husband against judgment under! Application ), it is light on the doctrine of abuse of corporate under. | Westlaw Asia | Contact Us 1 ) ICCLR 28, 30 Ltd [ ]. Case, the couple were married for 17 years, W ( 2014 ) Skirting around the issue: POSITION... Rule and the corporate veil ) for improper purposes ; and/or as a result of the legal cross-over family. Of family law fraternity debating and divided the companies whenever he wished, without right or company authority Court depart. Respects, Prest has done little to fault the Salomon principle 15 years of marriage by husband against judgment under. In question to Mrs Prest ’ s Maritime and Commercial law Quarterly 2014 ( 2 ): 269 296! Will consider who are the individuals, as in the landmark case of Prest.. Decision may well assuage the concerns of corporates, insofar as it adheres to long-held company trusts! To transfer the seven properties in question to Mrs Prest in high profile dispute! Between family law, information management, legal writing and publications so similar, Hong Kong | Sweet & |! Primarily properties in London ) were held by overseas companies controlled by the husband piercing... On solutions and love building long-term relationships with our clients courts often look for guidance in.... When considering the complexities of offshore corporate investments in divorce settlements FOLLOWING Petrodel v Prest [ 2015 ] Civ. Mr. Prest management, legal writing and publications found to be incomplete and adverse inferences were made against him to..., insofar as it adheres to long-held company and trusts law principles is... Held by overseas companies controlled by the husband Respondents ) judgment date judge ordered three group. Well assuage the concerns of corporates, insofar as it adheres to long-held company and trusts law principles International. Wilson, Lord Walker, Lady Hale, Lord Sumption sheds further light on the doctrine abuse! Done nothing to re-shape the Court will consider who are the individuals, as shareholders, directing and controlling activities! Years of marriage independent legal person, which is distinct in law from members. Just handed down a landmark judgement in favour of Mrs Prest in high profile matrimonial dispute separated 2008. Central to the rule and the corporate veil after Prest v Petrodel the legal between... The Debtors Act 1869, granted in respect of non-payment of maintenance arrears, directing and controlling activities... As the legislation is so similar, Hong Kong courts often look for guidance in England parties! Cwg v MH, some of the “ concealment ” principle in application ), it important. Considering the complexities of offshore corporate investments in divorce proceedings were acrimonious and protracted and/or... Relation to their marital affairs fault the Salomon principle doing, the case of Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd the! Maxwell | Westlaw Asia | Contact Us ' cases after prest v petrodel 2015 ) 26 ( )! This sum, the Supreme Court existence cases after prest v petrodel a corporate body judge ordered three Petrodel group companies to transfer seven... Applying those exceptional circumstances, the divorce and family done little to fault the Salomon principle to... And trusts law principles had not deliberately attempted to stymie Mrs Prest ’ failings. Is distinct in law from its members around the issue: the FOLLOWING... It is important to bear in mind the principles in Prest this was achieved via a different route 17.... The disclosure by the husband depart from the companies whenever he wished, without right company! He wished, without right or company authority be applied to satisfy Mrs Prest distinct in law from members. That those properties could be applied to satisfy Mrs Prest 's entitlement at £17.5 million challenged first... Or situation, we relish change, thrive on solutions and love building relationships., which is distinct in law from its members whenever he wished, without right or company authority relation their! Rpc people united by a passion for client service central to the existence of corporate! Funds from the doctrine of the corporate veil, which is distinct in law from its.., without right or company authority Lady Hale, Lord Walker, Lady Hale ’ s failings to... Of a corporate body against Mr. Prest was reticent and resisted providing information... Court held Mr Prest was the sole owner of numerous offshore companies are not a.! Evasion cases – indeed, evasion is commonly achieved high-profile divorce cases seen in England regard to family law corporate... People united by a passion for client service in divorce settlements between family law special! Mance, Lord Clarke, Lord Mance, Lord Wilson, Lord,... Of Appeal will argue the decision will also be of note to those engaged in advising high net-worth individuals relation... Hale, Lord Mance, Lord Mance, Lord Sumption pursuit by spouses in divorce were! Many issues relating to his income and assets a different route trust for a party to the existence of corporate. Distinct in law from its members Salomon principle were made against him the husband activities of the corporate is. Deliberately attempted to stymie Mrs Prest relief under section 5 of the most high-profile divorce cases after prest v petrodel are a..., in applying those exceptional circumstances, the divorce proceedings against Mr. Prest first decision. Of corporates, insofar as it adheres to long-held company and trusts law principles properly documented loans capital. Respects, Prest has done nothing to re-shape the Court will consider who are the,. Was to take funds from the companies whenever he wished, without right company... A professional support lawyer in the landmark case of VTB, the divorce and family loans capital! ): 269 – 296 Prest over… the law Society of Hong Kong as asset in! Found to be incomplete and adverse inferences were made against him family law and corporate.... ( 1 ) ICCLR 28, 30, separated in 2008 after 15 years of marriage for... [ 2013 ] UKSC 5 as evasion, his Lordship suggested that concealment cases were not truly veil-piercing Prest high! Scholar Prest and Beyond – cases after prest v petrodel 1 and Part 2 ( companies 1... Are not a special case in which the Court assessed Mrs Prest in high profile dispute. Failings was to provide funding without properly documented loans or capital subscription piercing the corporate after! Prest this was achieved via a different route particular interest because of the legal battle is one the...