Abstract

The main purpose of this article is to study the limits of the principle of limited liability. Part 1 covers the cap piercing rules. Part 2 examines the common law rationale for removing the veil, which is often offered to uncover the main reason why the judiciary ignores the principle of individualism. This paper proposes an exception to this general rule. The agency, fraud, evasion, abuse, and accomplices characterizations indicate that the court made an effort to consider the parties, shareholders, creditors, or other third parties in the decision. We have no legal interest in the company's affairs and we do not undermine the conduct of the company's management and limited shareholders. Part 3 deals with the comparative aspects of the legal norms related to the wearing of the headscarf.

Keywords