slrСибирское юридическое обозрениеSiberian Law Review2658-76022658-7610Сибирский юридический университетslr-1217Research ArticleГРАЖДАНСКОЕ ПРАВО (архивный раздел)Производная ответственность материнской компании за действия дочерней компанииБашировМ. А.noemail@neicon.ruКазахстанско-Американского свободного университетаRussian Federation2010300620100124850Copyright © Баширов М.А., 20102010Баширов М.А.Баширов М.А.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://www.siberianlawreview.ru/jour/article/view/1217ReferencesСм.: Rixon F. G. Lifting the Veil between Holding and Subsidiary Companies. 102 Law Quarterly Review, LQR, 1986. P. 423.См.: Rixon F. G. Lifting the Veil between Holding and Subsidiary Companies. 102 Law Quarterly Review, LQR, 1986. P. 423.См.: Smith Stone and Knight Ltd v. Birmingham Corporation, 1939.См.: Smith Stone and Knight Ltd v. Birmingham Corporation, 1939.См.: Grantham R. and Rickett C. Corporate Personality in the 20th Century, Hart, 1998. P. 11-63.См.: Grantham R. and Rickett C. Corporate Personality in the 20th Century, Hart, 1998. P. 11-63.См.: 43 New South Wales Law Report (1998) 554. P. 579-584.См.: 43 New South Wales Law Report (1998) 554. P. 579-584.См.: Haar B. Piercing the Corporate Veil and Shareholder's Products and Environmental Law in American Law as Remedies for Capital Market Failures. 2 EBOR (2000), 317.См.: Haar B. Piercing the Corporate Veil and Shareholder's Products and Environmental Law in American Law as Remedies for Capital Market Failures. 2 EBOR (2000), 317.См.: Corporations Act 2001 (Australia) s 50 AA (3).См.: Corporations Act 2001 (Australia) s 50 AA (3).См.: АМС 2194 (USDC - ND Illinois - McGarr J).См.: АМС 2194 (USDC - ND Illinois - McGarr J).
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.