Tuesday, April 19, 2005

Geoffrey Hills - Courts are unlikely to find against James Hardie Industries

Geoffrey Hills reminds us of how the notion of corporate veil was established the Salomon's case in 19th century England, and questions whether corporate law should give way to moral law.
The fundamental aims of tort and corporations law are in conflict. It has been observed that protection of the vulnerable is the “golden thread” and “core moral concern” of Australian tort law, but the courts also recognise the central economic importance of corporations law. At a moral level, there could hardly be a case in which responsible entities were more deserving of being stripped of the protection offered them by the separate entity doctrine of corporations law than one in which people have suffered terminal illness through the torfeasors’ concealment with knowledge of the real risks of their product.

This is a very well written article, and I would have to quote it beyond reasonable grounds of fair use, I suggest you have a read of it yourself. In particular, it discusses the scope of limited liability and acts of good faith.


  • CSR v Wren - expanded proximity test


Post a Comment

<< Home