Piercing the corporate veil because the enactment in the New Companies Act. 1 A company, as a separate entity, can be an acknowledged concept in South Photography equipment law. It really is clearly set by the Constitution:
A dotacion of the Invoice of Rights binds an all natural or a juristic person if perhaps, and to the extent that, it is relevant, taking into account the size of the right plus the nature in the duty enforced by the right. 2
Even though a company is acknowledged as a separate entity, it is common sense a company are unable to act independently, because it is not just a living person. A natural person will always be the face area of a company to the outside the house world. Because of this , capacity and representation of your company are a few of the most important rules of a company.
There is a great existence of the misconception that the company's individual entity is definitely absolute and untouchable. Actually there is a tendency for natural persons to use a company's separate legal personality as a defend to elude liability. several To remedy this, courts have got, in certain circumstances, to what is referred to as вЂpierced the corporate veil' of your company. 5
вЂPiercing the organization veil' entails the disregarding of a
business corporate business. Although a company's separate entity must not be disregarded in the event another treatment exists. 5 There is no doubt that courts are inclined to disregard the personality when it is near do so. The separate legal personality of the company is to be recognised and upheld in the most unconventional of circumstances. 6 Inside the words of the learned Scott JA:
However what is, I do think, clear is that as a couple of principle in a case such as the present there should be at least some improper use of abuse of the distinction
Action 71 of 2008.
The Constitution in the Republic of South Africa Work 108 of 1996. several
Cape Pacific cycles Ltd versus Lubner Handling Investments (Pty) Ltd 1995 (4) SOCIAL FEAR 790 (A); Botha versus Van Niekerk 1983 (3) SA 513 (W); Consolidated News Agencies (Pty) Ltd (in liquidation) v Cellular Telephone...