Comment by navigate8310
2 days ago
Typically that would require uncovering the veil of the corporation and usually a limited company has safety provisions against these egregious acts.
2 days ago
Typically that would require uncovering the veil of the corporation and usually a limited company has safety provisions against these egregious acts.
Courts, in the US at least, can hold an officer of a corporation personally responsible for violating a subpoena order, if they were in a position to comply with it and chose not to. It's not technically a piercing of the corporate veil (because they are being personally ordered to comply), but it's effectively the same thing.
See Wilson v. United States
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/221/361/