Salomon V Salomon: Have the Liquidator’s Arguments Been Buried with Time?

Daniel Herszberg

Enterprise Governance eJournal2017https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.6934article
ABDC C
Weight
0.26

What the paper says

Extract: The decision of the House of Lords in Salomon v Salomon and Co Ltd is considered the ‘classic authority’ for the proposition that a company has a separate legal personality. This principle’s application engenders polarised debate, specifically with regards to corporate groups. Such groups generally operate as a single economic unit, with management of the parent company overseeing each company in the group (including subsidiaries). In Salomon, the liquidator mounted a number of counter-arguments. This critique focuses on the argument that the company was always Salomon’s agent in conducting business. In doing so, this critique questions whether the liquidator’s argument has continued significance in light of the agency quasi-exception and the general application of Salomon to corporate groups.

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.6934

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{daniel2017,
  title        = {{Salomon V Salomon: Have the Liquidator’s Arguments Been Buried with Time?}},
  author       = {Daniel Herszberg},
  journal      = {Enterprise Governance eJournal},
  year         = {2017},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.6934},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Salomon V Salomon: Have the Liquidator’s Arguments Been Buried with Time?

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.26

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.00 × 0.4 = 0.00
M · momentum0.20 × 0.15 = 0.03
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.