Ambuj Gupta, ILNU
ABSTRACT
Typically, under the law of agency, an agent is not held responsible for the actions they perform on behalf of the principal. However, if the agent enters into an agreement with the principal without revealing their identity to the other party involved, the agent may become personally accountable for their actions. This concept is known as the Doctrine of Undisclosed Principal. Both the Doctrine of Undisclosed Principal and the Corporate Veil Doctrine have developed to facilitate business transactions. The question arises: can the former complement the latter? This paper investigates whether a shareholder's liability can be examined from the perspective of agency and the Doctrine of Undisclosed Principal and explores why such an interaction might be relevant.
Comments