면책조항: 이것은 법률 자문이 아닙니다. 법률과 판례는 변경됩니다. 귀하의 특정 상황에 대해 항상 자격을 갖춘 변호사와 상담하십시오.

모든 판례
Company Law
Court of Appeal
1976

DHN Food Distributors Ltd v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council

[1976] 1 WLR 852

판결 이유

The corporate veil may be lifted to treat a group of companies as a single economic entity where the subsidiaries are wholly owned and controlled by the parent, and justice requires it.

사실관계

DHN traded from premises owned by its wholly-owned subsidiary, Bronze. The council compulsorily acquired the premises and offered compensation to Bronze (as owner) but refused business disturbance compensation to DHN (as it had no legal interest in the land).

판결 요약

The Court of Appeal lifted the corporate veil, treating DHN and its subsidiaries as a single economic entity. DHN was entitled to compensation for business disturbance as it effectively owned the premises through its subsidiary.

주요 인용문

"These three companies should, for present purposes, be treated as one."

Lord Denning MR

후속 처리

Doubted

Disapproved in Woolfson v Strathclyde [1978] and Adams v Cape Industries [1990]. The single economic unit theory is no longer generally accepted as grounds for piercing the veil.