Web wechat sex datingplus rutop

The board of directors of the subsidiary are responsible to manage the business and affairs of the subsidiary.The board selects officers and the officers are responsible to execute the policies of the board.And, this is the purpose of the parent’s control of its subsidiary: to hold it accountable for performance.As long as the parent permits the subsidiary to act independently under the direction of its board, there is little risk to the parent of being found liable for the negligence or wrong-doing of the subsidiary.Simply type in the web app’s address, log in and start chatting!

These reasons often include, for example: (1) the parent company desires to engage in a new line of business activity unrelated to its current business; (2) the existing or projected revenues from the new line of business activity are substantial; (3) the business enterprise prefers not to expose its assets to the liabilities associated with the new business line; or (4) the new business activities may carry risks of liability unacceptable to the parent; (5) the parent is a public corporation and it desires to keep the subsidiary privately held; (6) the parent wants to posture the subsidiary for going public without affecting the parent’s shareholders; or (7) that the organization desires to reward certain employees with increasing compensation, etc.After all, the parent in a parent/subsidiary relationship is merely a stockholder, and the law is clear that a stockholder is not liable for the actions, debts, or obligations of the corporation.However, if the parent exercises excessive control over the subsidiary by, e.g., commingling funds, interchanging employees, having its board serve as the board of the subsidiary, sharing office facilities, using a common letterhead, and otherwise blurring the distinctions between the parent and the subsidiary as separate independent corporations, then each corporation is at risk for the unfunded liabilities of the other under the legal doctrine of “alter ego.” Under this doctrine, a litigant may “pierce the corporate veil” of the subsidiary corporation and reach the assets of the parent corporation under the theory that the two corporations, for legal liability purposes, are not two independent corporations, but are but one corporation in fact.Jste si jist/a, že nechcete povolit verzi chatu využívající technologii Flash?Verze využívající Flash je plně vybavena a optimalizována.

Leave a Reply