Legal Developments and updates from the leading lawyers in each jurisdiction. To contribute, send an email request to
-
Shook, Hardy & Bacon currently authors the Insurance section of The
In-House Lawyer magazine. For more information and articles from this
author click here .
-
Shook, Hardy & Bacon currently authors the Insurance section of The
In-House Lawyer magazine. For more information and articles from this
author click here .
-
WilmerHale currently authors the Fraud and Corporate Crime section of
The In-House Lawyer magazine. For more information and articles from
this author click here .
-
Burges Salmon LLP currently authors the Environment and Energy section
of The In-House Lawyer magazine. For more information and articles from
this author click here
-
Macfarlanes LLP currently authors the Litigation & Dispute
Resolution section of The In-House Lawyer magazine. For more information
and articles from this author click here .
-
Druces currently authors the Insolvency and corporate restructuring
section of The In-House Lawyer magazine. For more information and
articles from this author click here .
-
Arnold & Porter (UK) LLP currently authors the EU & Competition
section of The In-House Lawyer magazine. For more information and
articles from this author click here .
-
Edwards Wildman Palmer UK LLP currently authors the Contract section of
The In-House Lawyer magazine. For more information and articles from
this author click here .
-
Shook, Hardy & Bacon currently authors the Insurance section of The
In-House Lawyer magazine. For more information and articles from this
author click here .
In the event that a safety problem is identified with one of your
products, you will need to undertake a risk assessment to comply with
the General Product Safety Directive.
-
Macfarlanes LLP currently authors the Litigation & Dispute
Resolution section of The In-House Lawyer magazine. For more information
and articles from this author click here .
This article considers the Supreme Court decision in VTB Capital plc v Nutritek International Corp & or s
[2013]. Perhaps the most striking aspect of the case is that it casts
doubt on the notion that the Court has the power to pierce the corporate
veil. The Supreme Court also held that, even if the power to pierce the
corporate veil does exist, it does not enable a claimant to hold
parties that control a company jointly and severally liable under
contracts entered into by that company.
ADELAIDE HOUSE, LONDON BRIDGE, LONDON, EC4R 9HA, ENGLAND
