{"issue_text":"Whether the corporate veil should be pierced to hold 2nd respondent personally liable for company's debt","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Company sold same property twice; director controlled company; judgment unsatisfied"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
The applicants, husband and wife, purchased two properties from the 1st respondent for US$27,200 but the 1st respondent could not transfer the properties as they had already been sold to another person. After obtaining judgment against the company which was not honoured, the applicants applied to pierce the corporate veil to hold the 2nd respondent personally liable.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases