翻訳と辞書 |
Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd : ウィキペディア英語版 | Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd
''Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd'' () (UKSC 34 ) 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. ==Facts== Mrs Yasmin Prest claimed under Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 sections 23 and 24 for ancillary relief against the offshore companies solely owned by Mr Michael Prest. Mrs Prest said they held legal title to properties that he beneficially owned, including a £4m house at 16 Warwick Avenue, London. They had married in 1993 and divorced in 2008. He did not comply with orders for full and frank disclosure of his financial position, and the companies did not file a defence. The Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 section 24 required that for a court to be able to order a transfer a property, Mr Prest had to be ‘entitled’ to the properties held by his companies.〔See MCA 1973 (s 24 )〕 Mr Prest contended that he was not entitled to the properties.〔Richard Todd QC and Stephen Trowell (later joined by Daniel Lightman) acted for Mrs Prest throughout. Mr Prest was represented by Martin Pointer QC, Kate Davidson QC and Simon Webster. The companies were represented by Tim Amos QC, Christopher Wagstaffe QC, Oliver Wise and Ben Shaw.〕
抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア(Wikipedia)』 ■ウィキペディアで「Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd」の詳細全文を読む
スポンサード リンク
翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース |
Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.
|
|