Freesexchat girls com


17-Oct-2017 18:20

Macaura's case is depending upon the fact that Company whether private or public is distinct from his owner if he took the policy from insurance company at the name of company then he could claim for damages. Only Macaura’s company, as owner of the timber, which had the requisite insurable interest in it.

Only the company, and not Macaura, could insure its property against loss or damage.

This separation of a company from its members was established in the House of Lords in the famous case. Salomon had a boot manufacturing business which he decided to incorporate into a private limited company.

For example, if I form a company called ‘Murphy & Co Ltd’ in which I own one hundred per cent of the shares and am a director and employee, legally speaking the company and myself are two distinct people.For all intents and purposes, all acts taken by these two company types are taken by the owners themselves.The company becomes a legal person in its own right, distinct from the This was seen in the famous case of Salomon v Salomon & Co Ltd (1897).He had not transferred the insurance policy to the company. After the sale, Macaura continued to insure the plantation in his own name. When Macaura attempted to claim on the policy, the company refused to pay.

The issue was whether Macaura had an insurable interest at the time of the loss.

The plaintiff, who was the major shareholder and managing director of the company, sought to conduct the company’s defence.