Isle of Man: Piercing The Corporate Veil

Last Updated: 12 June 2013
Article by Claire Milne

The corporate veil principle

One of the fundamental principles of company law is that a lawfully incorporated company has a legal personality and identity that is separate from its directors or shareholders and is a separate legal entity, vested of separate legal rights and liabilities. Consequently, any liability incurred by the company does not extend to its shareholders (beyond any money paid for their shares) and directors (beyond any personal liability imposed upon them as a result of their directors' duties). The courts are reluctant to undermine legitimate corporate structures by "piercing the corporate veil" and holding shareholders personally liable for the debts and obligations of companies.

The above-mentioned principle applies equally within groups of companies and, as a general principle of company law, the relationship between parent and subsidiary companies is that they are separate legal entities, with the corporate veil only being pierced where there is a sham or façade or where statute requires.

A court may have reason to pierce the corporate veil where a contract justifies the treatment of the parent and the subsidiary as one company (at least for some purposes) or where special circumstances exist, indicating that the company is a mere façade concealing the true facts. In identifying what is a mere façade, the motive of those behind the company will be relevant.

The present position

Isle of Man case law on the topic of piercing the corporate veil has treated English case law as persuasive and so, for the purposes of this article, I have considered the position on piercing the corporate veil as established under English case law.

English case law demonstrates that, although such cases are exceptional, English courts will, in certain circumstances, exercise their jurisdiction to pierce the corporate veil. Where the veil is pierced, the courts may grant remedies against the controllers of a company which, in principle, would ordinarily only be available against the company.

A court may look at the relationship between a group of companies and might find that the necessary standard of reliance for piercing the corporate veil is established where the evidence shows that the parent has a practice of intervening in the trading operations of the subsidiaries. The result would be that the corporate veil would be pierced and the parent and subsidiary would be treated as one company.

English case law has established a number of relevant principles which must be applied when deciding whether the corporate veil may be pierced. Those principles can be summarised as follows:

  • Ownership and control of a company are not sufficient in themselves to justify the piercing of the corporate veil;
  • The corporate veil cannot be pierced (even where there is no unconnected third party) purely on the basis that it is perceived that piercing the veil would be in the interests of justice;
  • There must be evidence of impropriety;
  • Impropriety alone is insufficient cause to pierce the corporate veil. It must be further evidenced that the impropriety is linked to the avoidance or concealment of a liability through the use of a corporate structure; and
  • The court may consider the intentions of the wrongdoer when considering whether to pierce the corporate veil. In any event, it must be shown that the wrongdoer controlled the company and used the company as a device or façade to conceal their wrongdoing.

Irrespective of whether the relevant company was incorporated with deceptive intent, the court will want to see that is was being used as a façade at the time of the relevant transaction(s). A remedy will only be provided in respect of the particular wrong that has been committed.

In summary, arguments based on piercing the corporate veil have only succeeded in very limited circumstances, where the company in question is a sham or façade and has been used for improper purposes.

Recent decisions and potential future developments

The main issue concerning the courts in the English case of VTB Capital plc v Nutritek International Corp and others [2011] EWHC 3107 (CH) was whether piercing the corporate veil could lead to a situation where non-contracting parties would be contractually bound under an agreement entered into by an associated company.

In the VTB case the claimant, VTB (an English bank), lent approximately $225 million to Russagroprom LLC (RAP) to fund the acquisition by RAP of a number of Russian dairy businesses from Nutritek. RAP subsequently defaulted on the loan and VTB, having recovered less than $40 million by enforcing the security provided, alleged that it was induced to enter into the facility agreement by fraudulent representations made by Nutritek and others. VTB alleged that the misrepresentations were part of a conspiracy between a number of legal and natural persons associated with RAP who were not parties to the facility agreement and argued that the court should pierce the corporate veil of RAP to find each of those persons liable under the agreement.

It was decided at first instance in the VTB case that the circumstances in which parties may pierce the corporate veil to bring contractual claims against individuals or companies that were not party to the original contract are limited to cases where there is some 'anterior or independent wrongdoing' by the controller of the company and that person attempts to use the company 'to immunise himself from liability for some wrongdoing' which existed outside the company. In reaching its decision, the court declined to follow the English cases of Antonio Gramsci Shipping Corporation v Stepanovs [2011] EWHC 333 (Comm), [2011] 1 Lloyd's Rep 647 (in which the court did extend the principle of piercing the corporate veil to find a third party liable as a co-contracting party) and Alliance Bank JSC v Aquanta Corporation [2011] EWHC 3281 (which followed the judgment in the Gramsci case).

Permission to appeal was granted in the VTB case and both the English Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court held that it would be contrary to both authority and principle (and therefore inappropriate) to allow the corporate veil to be pierced to treat an alleged controller of a company as a party to a contract entered into by that company.

The English Court of Appeal, in the VTB case, clarified the circumstances in which the English courts may pierce the corporate veil, rejecting the appeals from VTB and holding that the mechanism of piercing the corporate veil should not be used to allow contractual claims to proceed against non-contracting parties. In so holding, the Court of Appeal overruled the relevant parts of the decisions in the Gramsci case and the Alliance Bank case mentioned above as having been wrongly decided.

The Supreme Court, in the VTB case, found that it was unnecessary and inappropriate to decide whether the court has the power to pierce the corporate veil and acknowledged that the precise nature, basis and meaning of the principle of piercing the corporate veil, as well as the precise nature of the circumstances in which the principle can apply, are all 'somewhat obscure'. The Supreme Court expressly reserved for future decision the question of what is the true scope of the circumstances in which it is permissible to pierce the corporate veil, as well as the question of whether the Gramsci case was correctly decided.

The Supreme Court's judgment in the VTB case did little to clarify the law in connection with piercing the corporate veil and left open the question of whether there is scope for the principle to be extended in such a way in the future.

Most recently, the English Court of Appeal considered this issue in the case of Petrodel Resources Limited and others v Prest ([2012] EWCA Civ 1395), in which the Court of Appeal granted permission to appeal its decision in the case. The case raised the question of whether courts have the jurisdiction in financial remedy proceedings to order the transfer of properties or other assets belonging to companies owned by the parties. The appeal was heard, unusually, by a seven member panel of the Supreme Court on 5 and 6 March 2013 and it is expected that the Supreme Court's judgment will be handed down within 8 to 12 weeks of the hearing. That judgment should, hopefully, bring some welcome clarity to this area of the law.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions