تأملى بر دكترين گذر از شخصيت حقوقى در حقوق كامن لا

A Consideration on the Passage of the Legal Personality Doctrine in Common Law

تئورى گذر از شخصيت حقوقى به معناى مسؤول شناختن سهامداران شركت هاى سهامى و شركاى شركت هاى با مسؤوليت محدود در قبال بدهى هاى شركت است. در خصوص مبناي اعمال دكترين گذر از شخصيت حقوقي، مصاديق آن و قلمرو اعمال اين دكترين، چالش هايى وجود دارد. از يك سو موارد گذر از شخصيت حقوقى در كشورهاى مختلف متفاوت است؛ و از سوى ديگر اين دكترين موجب ناديده گرفته شدن شخصيت حقوقى مجزاى سهامداران و شركت مى شود؛ لذا در اعمال آن نبايد افراط شود. پرسش اصلى اين نوشتار، بررسى مبانى اعمال دكترين گذر از شخصيت حقوقى و قلمرو اعمال آن در نظام حقوقى كامن لا است. دكترين مذكور در حقوق كشورهاى مختلف پذيرفته شده و رويه ى قضايى مناسبى در اين خصوص شكل گرفته است. اين دعاوى بر مبانى مختلف قراردادى و غير قراردادى اقامه مى شود و ميزان موفقيت دعاوى به عواملى چون مبناى انتخابى براى اقامه ى دعوا و ميزان تسلط شركا بر شركت بستگى دارد.

The theory of piercing the corporate veil, means holding the shareholders of the joint-stock companies and the partners of the limited liability companies be responsible toward the company’s debt that is applied in the legal cases. This doctrine was first introduced in the English Law and then has applied in other common law systems. However, there are some challenges with regards to the basis of piercing the corporate veil doctrine application, its instances and the its scope of application. On one hand, piercing the corporate veil cases varies from country to country. On the other hand, given that this doctrine ignores the distinct legal personality of shareholders and company, so there is no need for its self – indulgent application. Accordingly, the main question that the Article intends to respond includes analyzing the basis of the Passage of the Legal Personality Doctrine application and its application scope in the Common law system. Finally, it will be ascertained that the piercing the corporate veil Doctrine has been accepted in the common law systems and there is also appropriate case law in this regard. These claims have been brought to the courts in accordance with a variety of contractual and non – contractual basis and their percentage of success depends on various factors such as the selective basis for bringing a claim, the degree of shareholder’s domination over the company and etc.