VTB Capital Plc v Nutritek International Corp and others – WLR Daily

Posted June 22nd, 2012 in appeals, assets recovery, company law, conflict of laws, fraud, law reports by tracey

VTB Capital Plc v Nutritek International Corp and others: [2012] EWCA Civ 808; [2012] WLR (D) 181

“There was no such thing in English law as a ‘remedial constructive contract’ and the courts had no jurisdiction to subject parties to contractual obligations under a contract to which neither they, not the only undisputed parties to the contract had ever agreed or intended they should be subject. The Court of Appeal was bound to uphold the principle that it was appropriate to pierce the corporate veil only where special circumstances existed indicating that it was only a façade concealing the true facts. The veil-piercing principle had been developed pragmatically for the purpose of providing a practical solution in particular factual circumstances and could not be invoked wherever it was necessary to do so in the interests of justice and no unconnected third party was involved.”

WLR Daily, 20th June 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk