What is the test for piercing the corporate veil in the context of a family law case?
Ontario, Canada
The following excerpt is from Kazarian v. Fraser, 2010 ONCA 747 (CanLII):
The trial judge applied the correct test for piercing the corporate veil in the context of a family law case: see Wildman v. Wildman. Given the findings of fact, the trial judge was right to set aside the transaction under s. 2 of the Fraudulent Conveyance Act.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
What are the implications of a family law case law review of the applicable provisions and case law principles for costs in family law? (Ontario, Canada)
In the context of the Divorce Act, what are some cases where the Court of Appeal has considered the meaning of notice in a family law context? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the case law on surreptitious recording of telephone conversations in a family law case? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the case law in the context of personal injury cases? (Ontario, Canada)
Is there any case law or case law that states that parties are not aware of the effect of the case on the other side? (Ontario, Canada)
What considerations have been considered in the context of a change of venue in a family law case? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the case law on medical malpractice in the context of medical negligence cases? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the case authorities in the context of a medical malpractice case? (Ontario, Canada)
In what circumstances will a court more readily pierce the corporate veil in the case of fraud or improper conduct? (Ontario, Canada)
Is a formal offer made by a plaintiff in a family law case not in compliance with r. 18 of the Family Law Rules? (Ontario, Canada)
