UK Company Law

UK Company Law
Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Institution
Course
Date
UK Company Law
The English Law posits that a corporation is accountable for the behaviors of the directors and its employees. In the case of contracts, the issue presents through the agency's rules in tort through vicarious liability doctrines. Notably, vicarious liability enforces strict obligation on the business for the directors' acts in the period of their service. Courts need to circumnavigate through different aspects to determine whether an officer's knowledge or actions should be attributed to the company. Such questions have come up in courts on various occasions. Generally, the knowledge and actions of the directors are credited to the firm. The instances of acknowledgment are complex to a specific fact. The principle is held not applied in cases where the subject is the knowledge of a company about the wrongdoings of a specific director. A review of the topic through the lens of various UK cases can explore whether companies incur primary or vicarious liability for the directors' acts and their officers.
One of the basic approaches of attribution is directing the attention of the policy. In such a case, the faults and behavior are assigned from the people's panel of directors to impact the company rule. The economic thoughts that define the corporate law detail that the corporate rules need to be addressed in the economic considerations. A similar instance is an evidence in HL Bolton (Engineering) Co Ltd v TJ Graham & Sons Ltd 1957.[H L Bolton (Engineering) Co Ltd v T J Graham & Sons Ltd [1957] 1 QB 159]
Companies are considered artificial entities and, as a result, cannot act themselves or have a state of mind. However, the corporation's personality makes it essential for the law to feature the mind's acts and conditions to specific individuals. The problem in such cases is the increase of the company's misbehaving actors, the definition and adoption of the applicable rules have also become unpredictable. There are also concerns related to corporate attribution and its application in sophisticated organizations. These call for the need to revisit the rules of attribution. Therefore, these rules ascribe acts or familiarity to the company may rest upon the types of accountability and signed or criminal obligation, which is attributed inversely. In such cases of contract responsibility, the drive is to launch authority where these criminalities relate to unlawful behaviors. In the firm’s criminal liability, a basis of an attribution to the firm as its conduct and will is essential.
The traditional method of corporate accountability is based on the person rather than the corporate responsibility. In the English corporate law, both the individual and the vicarious obligation model is adopted when crediting the human traits to the non-natural being. These philosophies are founded pom the imaginary nature of the firm. In such scenarios, the actions and will of directing the mind are considered the business's action and will. It is, however, important that the individual is viewed as the other ego of the firm. Direct attribution is considered an identification doctrine founded on the ascribing of a person'...