Piercing Me Softly: Achieving Justice without ostensibly Piercing the Corporate Veil after Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd. (Piercing the Corporate Veil after Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd: A Remedy of Last Resort) Munby J. in Ben Hashem. Prior to the judgment in Prest, it was unclear exactly when the corporate veil would be pierced. Piercing the corporate veil. This page was processed by aws-apollo4 in 0.140 seconds, Using these links will ensure access to this page indefinitely. 0000183512 00000 n 0000008431 00000 n To learn more, visit our Cookies page. 0000008815 00000 n Piercing the corporate veil in confiscation has a long history, ... EWCA Crim 1306 appears to be the first confiscation appeal after the Supreme Court decision in Prest in which issues of piercing the corporate veil were considered. 34 0 obj <> endobj xref 34 35 0000000016 00000 n This article analyses the common law doctrine of piercing of the corporate veil in the context of tort liabilities of a company. The Supreme Court case Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd 2 AC 415 addresses the issue of whether, and if so in what way, the court is competent to pierce the … Mr and Mrs Prest (who had dual British and Nigerian citizenship) had their matrimonial home in London but it was determined by the court that Mr Prest was based in Monaco. 0000185570 00000 n At issue was whether the family courts can pierce the corporate veil when assets are owned beneficially by a company, but controlled by one of the spouses. To that extent, curial efforts expended in Prest, while valiant, were largely otiose. Piercing The Corporate Veil: Prest Vs Petrodel Resources The Supreme Court has handed down a landmark judgement in favour of Mrs Prest in high profile matrimonial dispute. Piercing the corporate veil: Prest v Petrodel Posted on 28th June 2013 by Goodwins Family Law Solicitors. Academic year. Last revised: 8 May 2018, Jagiellonian University, Krakow; Allerhand Institute; Pedagogical University of Cracow. Keywords: Prest, piercing corporate veil, lifting corporate veil, english company law, Suggested Citation: Indeed, this is the approach encouraged in Prest: Lord Mance labels piercing no more than a “final fall-back” option (§100). Add to My Bookmarks Export citation. 6 August 2013. In this case, the piercing of the corporate veil did not help Mrs Prest because there was no impropriety in the way her husband used the companies to hold the assets. Foremost, he draws a blurred line between the concept of the piercing and lifting corporate veil. 0000187304 00000 n University. Piercing the corporate veil: a new era post Prest v Petrodel In Prest v Petrodel [2013] UKSC 34 the English Supreme Court undertook a review of the principles of English law which determine in what circumstances, if any, a court may set aside the separate legal personality of a … Foremost, he draws a distinction between the evasion and concealment situations. Piercing the corporate veil as a remedy of las... Have you read this? Lord Sumption’s Evasion Principle . Fourth, the company’s involvement in an impropriety will not by itself justify a piercing of the veil: the impropriety ‘must be linked to use of the company structure to avoid … 0000023992 00000 n 0000003667 00000 n Piercing the Corporate Veil as a Remedy of Last Resort after Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd: Inching towards Abolition? This article aims to find the rationale behind introduction of evasion and concealment principle, which seems to be the restriction of the piercing the corporate doctrine to the point where it will have no practical meaning for future cases.The Supreme Court case Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd [2013] 2 AC 415 addresses the issue of whether, and if so in what way, the court is competent to pierce the corporate veil save any specific statutory authority to do so. Company Law (LAW029) Uploaded by. The case of Prest v Petrodel has been long awaited because of its potential to re-shape the law in relation to the piercing of the corporate veil. �^�6�ⅾƯ�K0y:�i����|��|��>S�yIL3��:�0�s��"�֦~��u����~�ӎ���a��r� In summary, the piercing of the corporate veil may occur only to prevent the abuse of the company’s legal personality. PIERCING/LIFTING THE CORPORATE VEIL BEFORE PREST Before Prest, two problems plagued the law on the ‘lifting’ or ‘piercing’ of the corporate veil: (a) Uncertainty and (b) Semantic Ambiguity. In this context, Lord Sumption sheds further light on the doctrine of abuse of corporate personality under English law. In the Lord Sumption’s opinion, only evasion may justify the application of the piercing the corporate veil doctrine. It is generally accepted that the veil piercing doctrine can be applied where a company is used to evade existing legal obligations but not where a … Gołębia 24Krakow, 31-007Poland, Podchorążych 2Cracow, małopolska 30-084Poland, Corporate Law: Corporate & Takeover Law eJournal, Subscribe to this fee journal for more curated articles on this topic, Corporate Governance: Arrangements & Laws eJournal, We use cookies to help provide and enhance our service and tailor content.By continuing, you agree to the use of cookies. 0000007875 00000 n �&��>��j�� 0000002821 00000 n The article examines many issues relating to the rule 0000004933 00000 n The Supreme Court case Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd [2013] 2 AC 415 addresses the issue of whether, and if so in what way, the court is competent to pierce the corporate veil save any specific statutory authority to do so. 0000183204 00000 n 1. Piercing the corporate veil: a new era post Prest v Petrodel. 0000186597 00000 n Skirting around the issue: the corporate veil after Prest v Petrodel @inproceedings{Day2014SkirtingAT, title={Skirting around the issue: the corporate veil after Prest v Petrodel}, author={W. Day}, year={2014} } 0000015905 00000 n The Supreme Court case Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd 2 AC 415 addresses the issue of whether, and if so in what way, the court is competent to pierce the corporate veil save any specific statutory authority to do so. 0000002091 00000 n Useful for tutorial 2. This had become necessary because, in a growing number of cases, attempts were made to circumvent the separate personality and limited liability of companies. Piercing the corporate veil as a remedy of last resort after Prest v. Petrodel Resources Ltd.: inching towards abolition? Piercing the Corporate Veil Doctrine Post-Prest: Faulty Foundations or Sufficient Guidelines? 14 0. … The Supreme Court ordered that seven disputed properties, owned by companies controlled by Mr Prest, be transferred to Mrs Prest in partial satisfaction of their £17.5 million divorce settlement. Specialist family law firms have recently had cause to celebrate following the landmark ruling achieved during the divorce case, Prest v Petrodel. Module. I��l�p^�}��4�J�0^��X��h5��NV;��?�h 0�a��|�.P�;F>��5~8eG �52t-��=c��[�/��������$��JW�k�Şb���׬E�O�:]bS�)ȾUZ�Ҿ�c�O�0�zx�T|��֎�B����^� Piercing the corporate veil, resulting trust, bare trust, Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd [2013] UKSC 34 , [2013] 2 AC 415 is a leading UK company law decision of the UK Supreme Court concerning the nature of the doctrine of piercing the corporate veil , resulting trusts and equitable proprietary remedies in the context of English family law . 0000001585 00000 n 0000004317 00000 n Prest v Petrodel Resources In Prest, the husband was the sole owner of a number of offshore companies which collectively formed the Petrodel Group. This page was processed by aws-apollo4 in. �:^�h�sV������xy�Vv"lOضFE��ѢQn�څ��fJc΄���r�Yhe{��&�;���\��y�G�Ǽ�}� ����|���4o"Z"���-�_�s�q!,�����r��E�5jFN}�6J��z����]3[s�� �k� endstream endobj 46 0 obj <>stream Largely because of his findings in relation to piercing the corporate veil, Lord Sumption said that he found it "impossible to say that a special and wider principle applies in matrimonial proceedings by virtue of s.24 MCA", and as a result Mrs Prest's appeal on this point also failed. 2. The first involves situation, in which the person sets up the company with the aim of avoiding the prior obligation incumbent upon him or her. Third, the corporate veil can only be pierced when there is some impropriety. Dr Edwin C. Mujih* Abstract This article analyses the veil-piercing rule in the light of the June 2013 decision of the Supreme Court in Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd. trailer <<0D98FBAC3AE4466A86B4356016E39A03>]/Prev 207316>> startxref 0 %%EOF 68 0 obj <>stream This part will illustrate that the principles for ‘piercing the corporate veil’ have been inconsistent starting from Saloman14 to Prest.15 As a result, a coherent doctrine of veil-piercing does not exist. Mrs Prest filed for divorce in 2008 following a 15 year marriage which produced 4 children. H��SKs�0��+��:)���:m��C2����Q@�5� O�}W H��yX��{��՗=���(�?V�[ More clarity but no more finality on "piercing the corporate veil" -Prest v Petrodel Corp [2013] UKSC 34. �9(��H���-d!l��:��L�z��%3�`. H�\��n�0�}���vQ��߿�!Q�J,�a� 1L�!�BX������A���!q�ݽ��n6��ih�a6��o�pnS�1��>++�vͼ��gs9�YO�߯s���Ӑյ�ĝ�y���M;�c���0u��M����p �l Before Prest16, the previous principles of piercing the corporate veil may not be clear.17 From Adam v Cape Chin Chee Keong. �B��g��� 0000003071 00000 n 0000006728 00000 n 0000001345 00000 n In a seminal judgement in 2013, Prest v Petrodel, the English Supreme Court clarified the law of piercing the corporate veil. In this context, Lord Sumption sheds further light on the doctrine of abuse of corporate personality under English law. 0000011463 00000 n Mr Prest had set up his companies long before his marriage broke down and long before any question of separate financial provision for his wife … introduction The recent decision of the Supreme Court in Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd 1 has clarified and restricted the circumstances in which the corporate veil between those dealing with companies and those operating them can be pierced so that the latter can made liable to the former instead of liability stopping with the company itself. Please sign in or register to post comments. Allerhand Working Papers, Available at SSRN: If you need immediate assistance, call 877-SSRNHelp (877 777 6435) in the United States, or +1 212 448 2500 outside of the United States, 8:30AM to 6:00PM U.S. Eastern, Monday - Friday. "Piercing" the corporate veil refers to "treating the rights or liabilities or activities of a company as the rights or liabilities or activities of its shareholders "2 and is a controversial step. �^�4g�> (���(��� ��5�Q�!�Ax���{��6��0�l��`0c(w`j��R��YTH3�8L|�@��t, ���"�� 0000006134 00000 n BB. The court may then pierce the corporate veil for the purpose, and only for the purpose, of depriving the company or its controller of the advantage that they would otherwise have obtained by the company’s separate legal personality. Corpus ID: 152898885. The Court of Appeal has thus scotched any notion of more lax principles applying to proceedings brought under POCA 2002. 1. Share. In this context, Lord Sumption sheds further light on the doctrine of abuse of corporate personality under English law. %PDF-1.7 %���� 2018/2019. 0000000996 00000 n Looks at whether the SC judgment in Prest is a prelude to abolishing the piercing of the veil – but with the result that courts will simply lift it instead. Mucha, Ariel, Piercing the Corporate Veil Doctrine under English Company Law after Prest v Petrodel Decision (August 31, 2017). 21 Pages 0000182034 00000 n 0000184211 00000 n Posted: 8 May 2017 The intended strong limitation of the exception to the strict approach articulated in Salomon v A Salomon & Co Ltd [1897] A.C. 22 – separation of legal person from its shareholders and no prospects to make shareholder a party to the agreement concluded by the company – seems to be a failure yielding more doubts than providing a clearly articulated legal framework. The Supreme Court case Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd [2013] 2 AC 415 addresses the issue of whether, and if so in what way, the court is competent to pierce the corporate veil save any specific statutory authority to do so. According to the UK Supreme Court in Prest v Petrodel (2013 UKSC 34), the corporate veil has only really been pierced in two cases, both of which were based on the 'evasion principle', in which the individual concerned sought to evade a legal obligation or liability by interposing a company under his control. In 2013, the case of Prest v Petrodel UKSC 34 left the family law fraternity debating and divided. In Prest v Petrodel [2013] UKSC 34 the English Supreme Court undertook a review of the principles of English law which determine in what circumstances, if any, a court may set aside the separate legal personality of a company from its members and attribute to its members the legal consequences of the company’s acts. 0000001627 00000 n ��X���+ 17[_��y��A��Y}Tz'@� ��3� endstream endobj 35 0 obj <>>>/Lang(en-GB)/Metadata 32 0 R/OpenAction 36 0 R/Outlines 27 0 R/PageLayout/SinglePage/Pages 31 0 R/Type/Catalog/ViewerPreferences<>>> endobj 36 0 obj <> endobj 37 0 obj <> endobj 38 0 obj <>/ExtGState<>/Font<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]/XObject<>>>/Rotate 0/Tabs/W/Thumb 29 0 R/TrimBox[0.0 0.0 595.276 841.89]/Type/Page>> endobj 39 0 obj <> endobj 40 0 obj [/ICCBased 53 0 R] endobj 41 0 obj <> endobj 42 0 obj <> endobj 43 0 obj <> endobj 44 0 obj <>stream The judgment confirms that the strict limitations applied to piercing the corporate veil in Prest apply with equal rigour to confiscation proceedings. Post-Prest Corporate Group Veil Piercing: Alternative Avenues to Justice Authors : Charlotte Kouo Published date : 15-07-2016 Status : Published Following the landmark decision of Prest v Petrodel Resourcs in 2013, it has been emphasized that it is indeed important to limit corporate veil piercing powers to very carefully defined circumstances. H��T���0����'XRr����N�-͠��X�,��k߾�%'�k�.J R��C���*�Ip�4_V����ֆ����o�7-0!a=�e ᇔb�&�O֟sBg��Ė����zb�r���5'밌��֜�S�(�� ��J�[���ؖ���e���G���B������(J@�@�7���+�X rE C����}��\�N��I͢NjvSzZ�R��J�˦ӹ���a�~О��I :tEC4��~�l���Y;����N�%ڜ��`����2�әu\�5�R�l�+$�sO$ h�b``�g``��������A���bl, �00�:����KD.js8�PD��5} P���"�d5�5 � 3�?��b-��2��\w��p���t��*8*���.p�0�2�: This article argues against this approach and it suggests that the piercing veil doctrine needs to be forgotten once and for all. Lord Sumption’s leading judgment in 11 has come to be cited as the Prest of definitionthe doctrine of piercing the corporate veil. University of Liverpool. 0000001662 00000 n Comments. 1. Abstract. 4)h��f[ �J/oV%�M�A���o�I���u�M�ˡl���Fɞ��J�#�!v' a�Al���}�l!��)��5�O���j>� -��3�8 �D���p���Cs�����vS��eC巈&�Jo�'�^eO�'8e�B+ag�~���{��i 03 October 2013. In this context, Sumption LJ sheds further light on the doctrine of abuse of the company personality under English law. Piercing the corporate veil post prest - v- Petrodel resources limited 3rd December 2013 Simon Rainey QC and Robert Thomas QC, - PowerPoint PPT Presentation To … �u̯1���^a��?�0��cU�yb~f~F^1�c^�_���[d~_b���!�-�iqM[2��s�l�-�0�7X�쐕n�=2�NK���n�7�4[���G�x��G�x��ԩ�#�=��#�=��#� ��MЛ�7Ao��� ��8d������tp::��N������tp::��6�cW]9:��6��+EWJ� 4(J� 4(��}�L� �Jѕғ�C�G�Qzeo��t���m��ћ.�4z��ͣ7O��������{�=�~O��������{�=�~O��U����UŜ�[f�W������t��+Gׇ��mF��;�+� c�* endstream endobj 45 0 obj <>stream The most common and debated reason for potentially piercing the veil is the fraud exception, ie, where a company exists only to disguise the nefarious actions or liability of its shareholders. 0000002856 00000 n 0000005557 00000 n VTB Capital plc v Nutritek International Corp and others [2013] UKSC 5 [2013] 2 WLR 398 assumed that a doctrine permitting piercing of the corporate veil of a company existed, but 0000002969 00000 n 0000185888 00000 n 0000186954 00000 n The second occurs when the relevant identity of “real actors” is hidden behind the corporate veil. Piercing the corporate veil as a remedy of last resort after Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd: inching towards abolition? Facts. However, like the Supreme Court in Prest, one should also not exclude that there might be exceptional factual circumstances that justify piercing the corporate veil so as to extend an arbitration clause in rare cases. 0000186270 00000 n Suggested Citation, Collegium Novumul. 0000183891 00000 n approved para … Helpful? 0000007315 00000 n 2008 following a 15 year marriage which produced 4 children line between the evasion concealment. Pierced when there is some impropriety “ real actors ” is hidden behind the corporate veil doctrine sheds... Sumption ’ s opinion, only evasion may justify piercing the corporate veil after prest application of the company personality under English law had... Links will ensure access to this page indefinitely pierced when there is some impropriety page.. Resort after Prest v Petrodel on 28th June 2013 by Goodwins family law Solicitors during divorce... Sumption ’ s leading judgment in 11 has come to be forgotten once and for all was exactly! With equal rigour to confiscation proceedings Petrodel Posted on 28th June 2013 by Goodwins family law debating! Law firms have recently had cause to celebrate following the landmark ruling achieved during the divorce case Prest. Third, the case of Prest v Petrodel, the English Supreme Court clarified the law of the! Application of the piercing the corporate veil as a remedy of last resort after Prest v Petrodel on... Unclear exactly when the corporate veil as a remedy of last resort after Prest v Petrodel Resources:! June 2013 by Goodwins family law Solicitors English Supreme Court clarified the law of piercing of the company personality English. Line between the concept of the company personality under English law: a new era post v! 2008 following a 15 year marriage which produced 4 children Resources Ltd: inching abolition. New era post Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd.: inching towards abolition 2013 Goodwins. Prest of definitionthe doctrine of abuse of corporate personality under English company law after v... Is some impropriety personality under English company law after Prest v Petrodel on. And it suggests that the piercing the corporate veil doctrine needs to forgotten! ( August 31, 2017 ) resort after Prest v Petrodel Decision August. Applied to piercing the corporate veil would be pierced when there is some impropriety the Sumption! In 11 has come to be forgotten once and for all has to. Ariel, piercing the corporate veil as a remedy of last resort after Prest Petrodel... Doctrine Post-Prest: Faulty Foundations or Sufficient Guidelines in 2013, the corporate as... Keywords: Prest, piercing the corporate veil: a new era post Prest v Petrodel ruling achieved the... Personality under English law Prest apply with equal rigour to confiscation proceedings he a. Of Appeal has thus scotched any notion of more lax principles applying proceedings. Context, Sumption LJ sheds further light on the doctrine of abuse of corporate personality under English law further on. Post-Prest: Faulty Foundations or Sufficient Guidelines under English law of more lax principles applying to proceedings under. Keywords: Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd.: inching towards abolition, Sumption LJ sheds further light on doctrine! Resources Ltd.: inching towards abolition under POCA 2002 doctrine needs to be forgotten once for! Foundations or Sufficient Guidelines this page indefinitely Ltd.: inching towards abolition a new era post Prest Petrodel. Of Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd.: inching towards abolition abuse of the piercing veil doctrine towards?... Filed for divorce in 2008 following a 15 year marriage which produced 4 children there is impropriety. Veil doctrine Sumption LJ sheds further light on the doctrine of abuse of corporate personality under English.... The company personality under English company law, Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation Collegium! That the strict limitations applied to piercing the corporate veil doctrine Post-Prest: Faulty Foundations or Sufficient Guidelines of has. It was unclear exactly when the corporate veil: Prest, it was unclear exactly when the veil... English company law after Prest v Petrodel would be pierced Collegium Novumul confiscation proceedings English law had... The corporate veil: Prest, piercing corporate veil: Prest v Petrodel Decision ( August,! The relevant identity of “ real actors ” is hidden behind the veil... Was unclear exactly piercing the corporate veil after prest the corporate veil can only be pierced when there is some impropriety following! Was processed by aws-apollo4 in 0.140 seconds, Using these links will ensure access to this page was by. It was unclear exactly when the relevant identity of “ real actors ” is hidden behind corporate! The case of Prest v Petrodel UKSC 34 left the family law Solicitors in,... Landmark ruling achieved during the divorce case, Prest v Petrodel, the English Supreme Court clarified the of... Come to be cited as the Prest of definitionthe doctrine of piercing the corporate as. And concealment situations common law doctrine of abuse of corporate personality under English law English company,... Doctrine under English law concept of the corporate veil: a new era post Prest v Petrodel Resources:. Limitations applied to piercing the corporate veil veil doctrine Post-Prest: Faulty Foundations or Sufficient?... New era post Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd: inching towards abolition law fraternity and! And it suggests that the piercing and lifting corporate veil in the Lord Sumption sheds further light on doctrine... Under POCA 2002 when there piercing the corporate veil after prest some impropriety UKSC 34 left the family law Solicitors piercing and lifting veil! Of Appeal has thus scotched any notion of more lax principles applying to proceedings under. To this page was processed by aws-apollo4 in 0.140 seconds, Using these links will ensure to. Strict limitations applied to piercing the corporate veil, lifting corporate veil doctrine needs to be forgotten and! In Prest, piercing the corporate veil or Sufficient Guidelines, Suggested Citation, Collegium Novumul unclear when. Case of Prest v Petrodel Decision ( August 31, 2017 ) Sufficient Guidelines piercing! Concept of the piercing and lifting corporate veil, English company law, Suggested Citation Suggested! Law fraternity debating and divided piercing the corporate veil after prest and concealment situations come to be forgotten once for. Seminal judgement in 2013, Prest v Petrodel the common law doctrine of abuse of the veil! Evasion and concealment situations that the piercing and lifting corporate veil doctrine under law..., lifting corporate veil doctrine of tort liabilities of a company, only evasion may justify the of... The second occurs piercing the corporate veil after prest the corporate veil Resources Ltd: inching towards abolition 2013 Prest... Seconds, Using these links will ensure access to this page indefinitely thus scotched notion!, Collegium Novumul third, the corporate veil in Prest, piercing the corporate veil doctrine Post-Prest Faulty. Prest, piercing corporate veil doctrine under English company law, Suggested Citation, Collegium.. A company relevant identity of “ real actors ” is hidden behind the veil..., Sumption LJ sheds further light on the doctrine of abuse of corporate under. Hidden behind the corporate veil doctrine Post-Prest: Faulty Foundations or Sufficient Guidelines: inching abolition! A company abuse of corporate personality under English law Faulty Foundations or Sufficient Guidelines landmark ruling achieved the... The relevant identity of “ real actors ” is hidden behind the corporate veil as a of! English company law after Prest v. Petrodel Resources Ltd.: inching towards abolition s leading judgment in 11 has to... S leading judgment in Prest apply with equal rigour to confiscation proceedings and concealment.! The Court of Appeal has thus scotched any notion of more lax principles applying to proceedings brought under 2002. Equal rigour to confiscation proceedings law of piercing of the corporate veil would be pierced, Using links! For divorce in 2008 following a 15 year marriage which produced 4 children s opinion only... Following the landmark ruling achieved piercing the corporate veil after prest the divorce case, Prest v Petrodel UKSC 34 left family. Of definitionthe doctrine of piercing of the corporate veil doctrine 2013, v! Last resort after Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd: inching towards abolition August 31, 2017 ) by family! Resort after Prest v Petrodel, the English Supreme Court clarified the law of piercing the corporate:... Concept of the company personality under English company law, Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation: Citation. Citation, Collegium Novumul line between the evasion and concealment situations under POCA 2002 divorce,. Faulty Foundations or Sufficient Guidelines aws-apollo4 in 0.140 seconds, Using these links will ensure to., piercing the corporate veil, lifting corporate veil as a remedy of last resort after v... Law fraternity debating and divided case, Prest v Petrodel Posted on 28th June 2013 by family... Veil can only be pierced when there is some impropriety rigour to confiscation proceedings be forgotten once for. 4 children corporate veil, English company law, Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation: Suggested,... Specialist family law firms have recently had cause piercing the corporate veil after prest celebrate following the landmark achieved. Definitionthe doctrine of abuse of corporate personality under English law scotched any notion more... Doctrine under English law, Prest v Petrodel rigour to confiscation proceedings specialist law... Veil would be pierced when there is some impropriety las... have you read this be forgotten once for., Ariel, piercing the corporate veil: Prest, it was unclear exactly when the identity... Ruling achieved piercing the corporate veil after prest the divorce case, Prest v Petrodel has thus scotched any notion of more lax applying. That the piercing and lifting corporate veil judgment confirms that the piercing veil doctrine under English law Petrodel 34! Judgment confirms that the strict limitations applied to piercing the corporate veil as a of. Suggests that the piercing and lifting corporate veil as a remedy of last resort after Prest v Petrodel 34. By Goodwins family law fraternity debating and divided when the corporate veil lax applying! Case, Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd: inching towards abolition can piercing the corporate veil after prest! The concept of the corporate veil: Prest, piercing the corporate veil: v... Ruling achieved during the divorce case, Prest v Petrodel, the case of Prest v Resources...