How to Be a Good Active Listener

Listening is a study skill most of us take for granted. Listening is automatic, isn’t it? We might think we’re listening, but active listening is something entirely different. Think of how much easier it would be to study for tests, to write papers, to participate in discussions, when you know you have really heard everything important that was said in the classroom, not only by your teacher but also by other students actively engaged in learning. It may sound silly, but active listening can be exhilarating. You might be surprised by how much you have missed in the past when your mind has gone off on errands like what to make for dinner or what your sister really meant when she said... You know what were talking about. It happens to everyone. Learn how to keep your mind from wandering with some tips here, plus a listening test at the end. Test your listening skills and then start practicing active listening in the classroom. It’s where your studying begins. Three Kinds of Listening There are three levels of listening: Half listeningPaying attention some; tuning out some.Focusing on your reaction.Commenting to others.Waiting for a chance to break in.Distracted by personal thoughts and what’s going on around you.Doodling or texting.Sound listeningHearing the words, but not the meaning behind them.Missing the significance of the message.Responding with logic only.Active listeningIgnoring distractions.Ignoring delivery quirks and focusing on the message.Making eye contact.Being aware of body language.Understanding the speaker’s ideas.Asking clarifying questions.Recognizing the speaker’s intent.Acknowledging the emotion involved.Responding appropriately.Remaining engaged even when taking notes. 3 Keys to Developing Active Listening Develop active listening by practicing these three skills: Keep an open mindFocus on the speaker’s ideas, not on the delivery.Give the speaker your full attention.Resist forming an opinion until you’ve heard the entire lecture.Don’t let the speaker’s quirks, mannerisms, speech patterns, personality, or appearance get in the way of listening to the message.Stay focused on the central ideas being communicated.Listen for the significance of the message.Ignore distractionsBe fully present.Make sure your phone is silenced or turned off. Everyone can hear a vibrating phone.Tune out any chatter around you, or politely tell the talkers that you’re having trouble listening.Better yet, sit up front.Face away from windows if you can to avoid outside distractions.Set aside all emotional issues you brought with you to the classroom.Know your own hot buttons and don’t allow yourself to respond emotionally to issues being presented.ParticipateMake eye contact with the speaker.Nod to show understanding.Ask clarifyin g questions.Maintain body language that shows you are interested.Avoid slouching in your chair and looking bored.Take notes, but continue to stay focused on the speaker, looking up often. Active listening will make studying later so much easier. By paying close attention to the significant ideas presented in the classroom, you’ll be able to remember the actual experience of learning the material when it comes time to retrieve it. The Power of Meditation If youre a person who has never considered learning to meditate, you might think about giving it a try. People who meditate take control of their thoughts. Just think of how powerful that can be in the classroom when your thoughts are wandering. Meditation also helps manage the stress of going back to school. Learn to meditate, and youll be able to pull those thoughts right back to the task at hand. The Listening Test Take this listening test and find out if youre a good listener.

Energy Crisis Essay example - 1131 Words

GLOBAL ENERGY CRISIS: THEN AND NOW Global Energy Crisis: Then and Now Introduction The world today faces an energy crisis. The world is dependent on certain natural resources like oil and natural gas that are quickly depleting. These resources are being imported from countries that have the ability to set higher prices due to demand (Nef 1977). Because of this, the world faces a great recession, and like Britain in the second half of the 16th century, we need to find alternative sources of energy. Britain found itself in an energy crisis and was on the brink of a recession however they were able to exploit a new means of energy and revitalize their country and situation. The purpose of this paper is to show similarities between†¦show more content†¦Complaints of deforestation came from all parts of the kingdom. This hurt the Britain economy and way of life as Britain was forced to find other materials for energy, and started using coal as a resource (Nef 1977). Using coal revitalized the economy and the necessity of use created many new inventions and opportunities for the country, and ultimately the world. Like Britain, many countries of today’s world are dependent on wood also. Countries still use wood as a means of building and for heat. Wood is also cut and exported as a means of revenue and like Britain, the United States and other countries are now faced with deforestation (Nef 1977). The data compiled by the World Preservation Foundation (WPF, 2010), reveals that the planet has already lost 80 percent of its forest due to deforestation, and going by the alarming rate at which the trees are cut, it will not take much time for that figure to reach the 100 percent mark (Nef 1977). In the same way Britain was forced to find other alternatives, the United States and other countries must expand their resources and find new ways. With Britain fighting the effects of deforestation, they had to find another source of energy. Coal had been discovered, but was not used much. Coal minersShow MoreRelatedEnergy Crisis2154 Words   |  9 PagesAn energy crisis is any great bottleneck) (or price rise) in the supply of energy resources to an economy. In popular literature though, it often refers to one of the energy sources used at a certain time and place. Causes Market failure is possible when monopoly manipulation of markets occurs. A crisis can develop due to industrial actions like union organized strikes and government embargoes. The cause may be over-consumption, aging infrastructure, choke point disruption or bottlenecks atRead MoreEnergy Crisis in Pakistan4667 Words   |  19 PagesElectricity Crisis in Pakistan is one of the severe challenges the country is facing today. Electricity is essential part of our daily life and its outage has severely affected the economy and overall living of ours. Thousands have lost their jobs, businesses; our daily life has become miserable. Pakistan is currently facing upto 18 hours of electricity outage a day, is expected to face more if not dealt with in time. The purpose of this study is to analyze the nature of this crisis and to proposeRead MoreHow Energy Crisis Is A Crisis Of Human Development Essay1124 Words   |  5 Pages1 Introduction: Energy production of any country is the measure of its economy. No country can achieve high economic growth without producing sufficient energy. Production of energy crisis is a Greek word which means ‘decisive moment’. Crisis is declared when something has gone to a level where an action must be taken to avoid complete disaster ‘Energy crisis, takes place due to several reasons some of which are: increasing price of oil,power wastage ,less dams,incompitancy of exploration sectorRead MoreEssay on Solar Energy and the Energy Crisis769 Words   |  4 PagesSolar Energy and the Energy Crisis Abstract The energy crisis is a major problem in the United States. Solar energy can help alleviate this problem. Enough solar panels to fulfill the energy needs of the entire United States would take up 27,347 km2 and cost almost 17 trillion dollars. Therefore, although there is enough space for all those solar panels, the economic cost is far too great. However, solar power can be phased in gradually. Solar Energy 3 Solar Energy: Can It Solve the EnergyRead MoreThe Energy Crisis Of Oil Essay1320 Words   |  6 Pagesis used to describe the global maximum in crude oil production which is predicted to occur in the near future. Once this maximum has been reached, global oil production will begin to forever decline afterwards, leading the world into a catastrophic energy crunch that could cripple our economy. Oil will become more difficult to extract, therefore making it more expensive as nations compete for the declining supply. The failure of economies to adapt to the staggering cost of oil will eventually killRead MoreEssay on Energy Crisis1570 Words   |  7 PagesEnergy Crisis Energy is important to our nation for many reasons. It is a key economic driver. It offers new market opportunities for business. Providing energy to our nation has been an exciting challenge in recent years. Many changes have been constant throughout that period. The past tells Americans that predicting the specifics of the energy future for our nation with great accuracy would be unlikely. Americans get their energy from different types of resources. With all the differentRead MoreThe Energy Crisis Of Nuclear Energy1334 Words   |  6 Pagestheir energy crisis. A study conducted in 2009 states that nuclear energy prices for electricity is $0.21/kWh, while wind power energy and solar photovoltaic panels can cost only $0.05-0.10/kWh (as cited in Shrader-Frechette (2011 p103)). The price comparison between energy sources show that nuclear energy is not the only effective option to solve the energy crisis. Furthermore, the effectiveness of the amount of dollar spent on nuclear e nergy is not very high compared to wind power. According toRead MoreEnergy Crisis in Pakistan2194 Words   |  9 PagesEnergy crisis in Pakistan Outline: Introduction Pakistan is a victim of energy crisis A shortfall of energy is called energy crisis Energy crisis is not specific to Pakistan Causes behind the energy crisis Poor management Circular debt Power theft and Power wastage Corruption and lack of accountability Mis-allocation of resources Increasing price of oil in international market In past no efforts were made Read MoreNanotechnology And The Energy Crisis1898 Words   |  8 PagesNanotechnology and the Energy Crisis A major problem facing the world today is the energy crisis. The amount of energy being consumed is much greater than the fossil fuels of the Earth will be able to keep up with in the long run. As energy use continues to grow, the demand for energy will exceed its supply. This is obviously a huge problem, and why this is being referred to as a crisis. However, nanotechnology can potentially solve this problem due to its ability to help make every aspect of producingRead MoreThe Energy Crisis Of 19791422 Words   |  6 PagesEnergy is a daily consumption that everybody uses in their daily lives. As a nation, we as modern people in the United States rely heavily upon energy sources such as oil, wind, thermal, natural, solar, hydraulic, etc. During the 70s, energy was a booming industry that everybody wanted to be a part of. This industry affected people s way of living and everyday use of technology such as house appliances, automobiles, industry, and city power grids. During this era, an energy crisis occurred which

Pv Trade War Between the Us and China Free Essays

string(150) " for installation of the panels without paying upfront for the panels thus the cost of downtime during the installation is not born by the customers\." Introduction International trade and competitive advantages in the costs of production in China have brought numerous opportunities for China’s exports but also generated challenges due to protectionism from its foreign competitors. Consequently, there have been numerous trade cases against China, including anti-dumping, anti-subsidy, in many economic sectors. The very current trade case involving China is the US accusing Chinese manufacturers of dumping photovoltaic (PV) panels in the US market and the Chinese government unfairly subsidizing its own solar industry. We will write a custom essay sample on Pv Trade War Between the Us and China or any similar topic only for you Order Now In fact, the US’s trade balances in polysilicon products between both the US and China, and the US and the world significantly deficit while China’s polysilicon cells and modules production has increased dramatically (The Kearney Alliance 2012). This essay claims that, the surge in PV exports does not necessarily mean that the Chinese government has subsidized its PV manufacturers illegally, and Chinese solar manufacturers’ low prices do not necessarily imply they are selling their PV products below the cost of production. Importantly, imposing such significant imports tariff is highly likely to undermine not only the bilateral trade between two countries but also long-term benefits of both countries. First, this essay provides an overview of the US-China PV trade case; then explains why China solar industry has been growing dramatically; and finally it analyses what the consequences might be if the US imposes a countervailing and antidumping tariff on China’s PV. Background On October 2011, seven US-based PV manufacturers headed by SolarWorld Industries America reported China on a double-anti case to US Department of Commerce (DOC) and US International Trade Organization (ITO). The seven manufacturers, which later formed Coalition for American Solar Manufacturing (CASM), accused China for dumping their PV module products to US market and giving a huge amount of export subsidy to this industry which in turn causing severe injuries to US PV manufacturers. Several investigations have been carried out by both DOC and ITC for this issue, as the coalition accused China government providing cash grants, heavily discounted resources, huge loans and credits, tax exemption, incentives and rebate and export grant insurance to the industry. In its final determination held on 10 October 2012, DOC proposed 18. 32 per cent to 249. 96 per cent of anti-dumping and 14. 78 per cent to 15. 97 per cent of countervailing duty. Further actions, including issuing or not issuing anti-dumping and countervailing duty orders, will be made after ITC final determination (US DOC 2012). Photovoltaic industry is a new emerging industry as a response to the threat of energy shortage and environmentally-unfriendly fossil fuel-based energy. Governments issued supportive policies, including giving significant account of subsidy considering higher production cost of this new energy industry compared to that of conventional one. In case of China, the country issued a PV market policy in 2007 that included deployment, investment and research and development supports under the scheme of middle and long term program of renewable energy development set by National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) targeting the energy of 300MWp by 2010 and 1. 8 GWp by 2020 of PV cells installed (Grau et al. 2011). This policy and its comparative advantage on labors result in excessive growth of China PV industries, making China’s world market share skyrocketing from 1 per cent in 2001, 5 per cent in 2005 to 50 per cent in 2010. In 2012, four of the top five PV producers are Chinese overtaking US manufacturers which occupy 27 per cent in 2006, decreased to 5 per cent in 2010 of the total world share (The Kearney Alliance 2012). Why has China’s PV grown so big so fast? There are a number of reasons why the PV industry in China has experienced tremendous growth within a short span of time. For instance, China produced about 1 per cent of the world’s solar cells in 2001, and by 2010 it produced nearly almost half (The Kearney Alliance 2012). The same rate of growth was achieved by Japan and Germany during their PV industry expansion; however the key difference is it took them twice as long (The Kearney Alliance 2012). First, such fast paced growth would not be possible without assistance from the government. The Chinese government has been providing many different kinds of assistance to the manufacturers to promote the growth of the PV industry in China. The government’s policy to boost the industry came in the form of loans, tax credits and grants. Additionally, some of the resources required for manufacturing of PV cells were subsidized or discounted to encourage manufacturers to produce more. In 2011, the Chinese government initiated a ‘Five-Year Plan’ to induce further growth of the PV industry well into the year 2015. Second, it is estimated that help from the government allowed some Chinese manufacturers of PV cells to have somewhere between 18-30 per cent cost advantage over their US counterparts (The Kearney Alliance 2012). The government alone is not responsible for the cost advantage enjoyed by the Chinese manufacturers; scale and vertical integration, and labour costs constitute significant part of the cost advantage. The scale and vertical integration of some of the top tier Chinese manufacturers means that they gain cost advantages due economy of scale; larger factories can produce at a lower cost, and additionally they tend to own or control majority of the companies in the supply chain as well as distributions outlets thus allowing them to maximize profit from supply, production and distributions. Moreover, labour costs are relative cheap compared to the US, especially for unskilled labour, where China has approximately 80 per cent labour cost advantage over the US counterparts (The Kearney Alliance 2012). Third, besides the assistance and cost advantages, some, if not all, Chinese manufacturers tend to offer trade credit, where solar power customers can purchase the panels without having to pay upfront and are given 60 days payment window to complete the deal. This provides tremendous financial benefit to the customers, as they will have some time for installation of the panels without paying upfront for the panels thus the cost of downtime during the installation is not born by the customers. You read "Pv Trade War Between the Us and China" in category "Papers" Finally, growth of China’s PV industry is also due to the extreme projected growth of domestic demand. In 2010, Chinese domestic demand for solar power was only 3 per cent of the world’s demand, and by the end 2014 this is expected to increase to 26 per cent (EPIA 2011). Is Chinese government providing illegal subsidies? Are Chinese manufacturers dumping their products on the U. S. market? The US government accuses the Chinese government of providing the export subsidies, which according to WTO rules is illegal. However, the Chinese government claims that the subsidies, grants, loans and discounts given to the manufacturers are intended to promote the solar power industry and make it cost competitive with conventional power sources. It is worth noting that it’s not just Chinese government that provides subsidies, the US also provides substantial subsidies to its solar power industry albeit to a slightly lesser extent and lower amount in dollar terms. For instance, the US government does not provide land grants or discounts, and the total stimulus loan/loan guarantee is only US$1. 3 billion compared to US$30 billion from the Chinese government (Goodrich et al. 2011). The US Department of Commerce accuses Chinese manufacturers of dumping PV cells on the US market. According to the WTO (WTO, 2012), dumping occurs when a company exports a good to foreign market at a price less than the price it normally charges in its domestic market. The US considers Chinese economy as non-market economy, thus the Chinese domestic price of PV cells cannot be determined directly from the Chinese market. Therefore, third or surrogate country needs to be chosen in order to determine the fair value of Chinese PV cells. The U. S Department of Commerce has chosen Thailand from a list of 6 countries as the surrogate country. This is unlikely to reflect an appropriate normal price for the Chinese PV since the costs of PV production in China is normally lower than those in Thailand. Possible consequences Both sides are currently still waiting for ITC’s final determination. If an affirmative determination is made in late November that imports of PV cells from China, no matter being assembled into modules or not, leads to US omestic industry being or is threatened to be materially injured, Commerce will issue the Anti-Dumping and Countervailing duties order. Back when the preliminary determinations was announced earlier this year, in which the DOC assessed countervailing duties ranging at a lower rate, most Chinese manufacturers breached a sight of relief and continue their business in U. S. as before. However, DOC’s final determination assessed significant higher countervailing duties at 14. 78 per cent -15. 24 per cent, comparing to its 2. 9 per cent-4. 3 per cent in the preliminary (US DOC 2012), undoubtedly it will have a severe impact on China’s manufacturers and global solar industry. As the subject of DOC and ITC’s investigation is PV cells that are manufactured in China, Chinese firms could shift manufacture or directly purchase PV cells from other countries to avoid tariffs on modules made of Chinese cells. An ideal location is Taiwan, which is already a robust solar cell manufacturing market. Although it is 8 per cent higher than using its domestic produced cells, cells made in Taiwan still have a 10-22 per cent cost advantage than the ones in the US (Wesoff 2012). Not to mention its relative closeness to China. However, using PV cells from other countries other than the US and assembles into PV modules is not a proper long-term strategy. The US could also initiate another investigation into Chinese PV modules assembled, using other countries’ cells. Thus, this is only a transitional strategy for Chinese manufacturers before China’s domestic demand for PV products picks up to ameliorate industry’s excessive supply situation. On the other hand, the imposition of high countervailing and anti-dumping duties might also affect the U. S. solar industry. In 2011, manufacturing only contributed 24000, or 24 per cent of the total employment in the solar industry (The Solar Foundation 2011). Punitive tariffs against Chinese cells will lead to a price jump on PV cells and modules in the US market, it causes the cost of solar projects in the US to increase and the implementation and demand for solar products to decline, which ultimately transits into lower employment in other sectors in the PV industry. The Coalition for Affordable Solar Energy commissioned a study showing that a 50 er cent tariff will indeed boost employment in the cell and module manufacturing sector. However, this tariff jump would also result in a huge decrease in employment from slowing-down discretionary spending by solar buyers and an overall demand decrease in other sectors in the whole PV industry. The net impact on total employment would be 15 per cent -40 per cent decline in the US PV industry compared to its 2010 numbers (Berkman et al. 2012 ). This means the resurrection of the US cells and module manufacturers is at the cost of the rest and the vast majority of the US PV industry. Another potential outcome is that Chinese manufacturers could retaliate against imposed tariffs. The US currently still has a huge positive net export of polysilicon and PV manufacturing equipment to China. In 2011, China attributed to around 30 per cent of the US total net exports of polysilicon and 60 per cent of PV capital equipment (GTM 2012). To protest against imposed tariffs and duties, Chinese manufactures could ramp up their own production of polysilicon or turn to other countries to fill the gap, effectively cutting out the US firms in the solar supply chain. Conclusion In sum, Governments in most industrial countries including the US and China have been promoting clean energy technology in recent years. Among the world’s solar producers, China’s booming renewable energy industry, especially solar industry has dominated world solar markets and challenges American leadership. President Obama affirmed the US’s concern about clean energy technology: ‘†¦to make sure that we win the competition. I don’t want the new breakthrough technologies and the new manufacturing taking place in China and India’ (Morris et al. 012, p1). Meanwhile the subsidy to energy, including solar industry, has been successful in China (rapidly increase its market share of world polysilicon production), the US policy subsidy on clean energy has not brought any expected result, even failure (i. e. bankruptcy of Solyndra–the California solar firm) (Robert et al. 2010). Trying to protect the domestic solar industry by p reventing other country’s polysilicon exports is highly unlikely to be a wise and fair policy. In particular, countervailing and anti-dumping duties would result in a significant decline in exports of polysilicon and PV manufacturing equipment to China as well as a fall in employment. Indeed, China could have several ways rather than bring the case to the WTO in responding to the trade barriers imposed by the US, but what the US needs to consider its long term benefit. The competitive price of Chinese solar as a cheap source of clean energy which potentially enhances the US economic growth, creates jobs for Americans and tackles with climate change. Reference Berkman, M, Cameron, L ; Chang, J 2012, ‘The employment impacts of proposed tariffs on Chinese manufactured photovoltaic cells and modules’, The Brattle Group, Washington, D. C. viewed 16 September 2012, . EPIA see European Photovoltaic Industry Association. European Photovoltaic Industry Association 2011, ‘Global market outlook for Photovoltaics until 2015’, viewed 12 Oct 2012, http://www. epia. org/index. php? eID=tx_nawsecuredl;u=0;file=fileadmin/EPIA_docs/publications/epia/EPIA-Global-Market-Outlook-for-Photovoltaics-until-2015. pdf;t=1351601058;hash=65fb67c830a17dc3384646f83c30e104 Goodrich, A, James, T ; Woodhouse, M 2011, Solar PV manufacturing cost analysis: US competitiveness in a global industry, Stanford University, viewed 25 Oct 2012, ;lt; http://www. nrel. gov/docs/fy12osti/53938. pdf;gt;. Grau, T, Huo M ; Neuhoff, K 2011, ‘Survey of photovoltaic industries and policies in Germany and China’, Climate Policy Initiative, Berlin. GTM 2012, ‘U. S. Solar Energy Trade Assessment 2011: Trade Flows and Domestic Content for Solar Energy-Related Goods and Services in the United States’, Greentech Media, Washington, D. C. Morris, AC, Nivola, PS ; Schultze, CL 2012, ‘Clean energy: revisiting the challenges of industrial policy’, The Brookings Institution, Washington, DC. Roberts, MJ, Lassiter, JB ; Nanda, R 2010, ‘US Department of Energy Recovery Act Funding: bridging the â€Å"Valley of Death† ‘, Harvard Business School. The Solar Foundation 2011, ‘Nation Solar Jobs Census 2011’, viewed 12 October 2012, . The Kearney Alliance, 2012, ‘China solar industry and the US anti-dumping/anti-subsidy case’, China Global Trade. USDOC 2012, ‘Fact sheet: Commerce finds dumping and subsidization of crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not assembled into modules from the People’s Republic of China’, Department of Commerce, The United States of America, viewed 15 October 2012, . Wesoff, E 2012, ‘Breaking news: Commerce Dept. Chinese solar panel dumping verdict is now in’, Greentech Media, viewed 17 October 2012, . WTO see World Trade Organisation World Trade Organisation 2012, ‘Anti-dumping, subsidies, safeguards: contingencies, etc’, The World Trade Organisation, viewed 10 October 2012, http://www. wto. org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/agrm8_e. htm How to cite Pv Trade War Between the Us and China, Essays

Case Study - Corporate Veil Of A Company - Liabilities On Shareholders

Question: Discuss about the Corporate Veil. Answer: The company is a separate legal entity; it has the right to sue another person, and the liability to be sued by another person. According to the provisions of law, a person cannot be held liable for the liabilities of another unless he has expressly or impliedly assumed responsibility, indemnified or guaranteed the other person[1]. In the same way, the directors and other shareholder of the company cannot be accounted for the rights and liabilities of the company, as it is a separate legal person. The corporate veil can be lifted by the court if the company had been formed with the intention of fraud. If the court is satisfied that fraud was the main reason for the creation of the company than in the ends of justice, it can pierce the corporate veil. The concept of corporate veil can be traced since 1612, in the case of Suttons hospital (1612)[2]. In the facts before the court was to determine whether or not the corporate veil can be lifted. In this case, the court provided that the incorporation of the company was valid and the corporate veil cannot be lifted[3]. One of the most significant about case with relation to the lifting of corporate veil is the case of Solomon v Solomon Co ltd 1986. In this case the defendant had solely owned the shares of a company incorporated by him. The defendant was also the debenture holder of the company. The company suffered losses and was ultimately wound up. The defendant as the debenture holder of the company claimed his debenture amount through the companys assets at the time of the winding up. There were very little assets left after the denture was claimed for the payment of other creditors who were the plaintiff. The court in this case dismissed the claim made by the plaintiff highlighting the concept of corporate veil between the owner and the company. The concept of piercing the corporate veil in the united kingdom had been highlighted in united kingdom through various cases such as Macaura v Northern Assurance Co Ltd 1925[4] and Solomon v Solomon Co ltd 1896[5] , where the court decided not to life the corporate veil in ends of justice. In the cases of Gilford Mortar Co Ltd v Horne and Tunstall v Steigmann 1962[6] the court lifted the corporate veil as the company for formed for a fraudulent purpose.[7] Dignam and Lowry have stated that the decisions made by the judges with respect to the cases involving the lifting of corporate veil is not clear and confusing and the judges hide such confusion behind apparent clarity. In the United Kingdom, the lifting of corporate veil is a very rarely used phenomenon. The doctrine of control for piercing the corporate veil and economic reality theory was tried to be established by the court of appeal in the early 1970s for the purpose of lifting the corporate veil. However, the House of Lords reasserted the orthodox approach to this concept. In the landmark case of Adam v cape Industries plc, the court provided that the corporate veil of the corporation can only be pierced by the court when the purpose of the formation of the corporation was fraudulent and had been established in order to evade an existing obligation. There are still various significant statements that are made by the judiciary to support the lifting of corporate veil in a broade r aspect with respect to the ends of justice. This concept provided by the judiciary is discussed in details in the landmark case Prest v. Petrodel Resources Ltd 2013[8]. This case discusses the concept of resulting trusts, piercing of corporate veil and equitable proprietary remedies with respect to English Family Law[9]. In this case, Ms Yasim Prest had made a claim under the provisions of section 23 and 24 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 for an ancillary relief against a company that was totally owned by her husband Mr. Michale Prest. According to the claimant, the husband had legal title with respect to the properties beneficially owned by him, which included a house worth 4million. She also claimed that her husband did not abide by the provisions of making a total and correct disclosure with respect to his financial position. According to the provisions section 24 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, the court has the power to make an order for the transfer of property, if the person against whom the claim is made, holds the legal title of the property. It was provided by the defendant that he did not hold the title of the properties which were claimed by the plaintiff.[10] The high court in this case held that, as the defendant had the powers to transfer the property in practice, it is assumed that he holds the legal title of the property in context with respect to section 24 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. It was held by the high court in this case that control and ownership themselves were not enough for the purpose of piercing the corporate veil. The court also provided that in case where there is no existence of a third party interest, the corporate veil cannot be pierced even for the purpose of serving the ends of justice. The court provided that only when there is a case of impropriety can the corporate veil is pierced. Such impropriety must have been related to misuse of the corporate veil for the purpose of avoiding an existing liability. In order to pierce the corporate veil the control of the person who has done a wrongful act is also needed along with the concept of impropriety[11]. The high court in this case justified the pairing of the corporate veil; however, such justification was not based on the general principals but on the provisions of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. In the same case, when an appeal was made to the court of appeal, the court provided that the decision made by the high court about distribution of the assets owned by a company according to the provisions of Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, was out of the jurisdiction of the court, unless the court had abused the corporate veil of the company[12]. The court of appeal provided that the decision of the high court was incorrect as for the purpose of piercing the corporate veil the company had to be formed based on a fraudulent purposes and it must have been shown by the court that the properties held by the company were on trust of the defendant. The decision made by the judges of the high court was not consistent with the decisions in major cases like Salomon v Salomon Co Ltd, Woolfson v Strathclyde Regional Council and Adams v Cape industries plc. In this case Justice Patten, further provided that this system of family courts with respect to the adoption and development of new approaches towards the assets owned by companies in ancillary relief enforcement is a different system of laws, which has no relevance for the existing laws. These approaches by the lower courts have to be stopped with immediate effect. There was again a difference of opinion in the same case between the two LJs of the court of appeal. Dissenting to concept provided by Patten LJ, Thorpe LJ provided a different concept with respect to the case[13]. He said that the reality in this case was very simple. The defendants used the company to provide for the extravagant lifestyle of himself and his family. This could only have happed if the company was in total control of the defendant and was not liable for any interest with respect to the third parties. As there was a complete control of the defendant over the company, he must have ignored the provisions of the company law towards the operations of the company. After the marriage had come to an end the defendant used the corporate veil as a defense to deprive his wife of her rights. If the present provisions of laws in this respect allows him to escape with such an act it would end the make the effort of the family court to achieve a fair result irrelevant[14]. The confusing in the approach of lifting the corporate veil by the courts can clearly be identified by the difference in these opinions. Further, the Supreme Court had overturned the decision of the court of appeal with respect to this case. The Supreme Court held that as the defendant has contributed personally to the purchase price of the property in context, he had a beneficial interest in the property. The court further provided that in this case there was no necessity of lifting the corporate veil, as this concept is applicable in a very limited situations. The court provided that as the defendant had the title with respect to the assets of the companies with respect to a resulting trust so the transfer of rights under section 24 of Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 was valid[15]. The first judgment in this case as given by lord Sumption, he provided that the corporate veil could be pierced in very rare circumstances, when the company had been formed with the fraudulent motive of escaping an existing obligation[16]. The lifting of corporate veil can only be used to dispossess the controllers of the company of the powers, which they have obtained through the concept of corporate veil. In this case, it cannot be proved that the defendant had created the company to escape the obligation arising out of the divorce, thus corporate veil cannot be lifted. He also provided that the high court had no powers to order the transfer of property under section 24 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. Such powers could only arise if the defendant held beneficial interest in the property, the evidence of which in this case of obscure because of mendacity and obstruction of the defendant[17]. The justice in this respect said that there are ways in which, remedies can be provided without lifting the concept of the corporate veil of the companies. he provided examples that an person who is the controller of the company can be held liable as he is the agent of the company, or properties belonging to the companies can be transferred as the controller holds beneficial interest in the property. He provided that there can be many remedies like injunctions, specific performances, provisions of the company act and competition law which been be given without lifting the corporate veil of a company[18]. He added that when the concept of lifting the corporate veil is being talked about, these rules could not be related to it, only in cases, which are truly exempted from the rule of the case Salomon v Salomon co ltd can be related to the doctrine of piercing the corporate veil[19]. Lord Neuberg in this case provided that lifting of the corporate veil should only be done as a last resort. Lord Wilson in this regard gave another view, he provided that the piercing of corporate veil in all cases cannot be classified into cases of evasion or concealment. Lord Mance gave a view that the future situations in which the veil might have to be lifted should not be foreclosed. Concurring to this judgment, lord Clarke provided that corporate veil should only be lifted when there is no other option left. Lord walker in this case gave the view that lifting the corporate veil of a corporation is not at all a doctrine it is only a label. [20] It can be concluded with the decisions of all the judges in this case that, the concept of piercing the corporate veil was unclear and confusing; this concept was not helpful for most of the judges. When it comes to piercing the corporate veil, the judges are always engaged in the process of finding the appropriate principles to adequately address and govern this concept. The judges in order to make their decisions with respect to lifting or piercing the corporate veil rely on several factors such as sham or fraud, agency, determination of nationality, tax evasions and single economic entity[21]. The landmark case of Adams V cape Industries 1991[22] the argument based on a single economic entity was rejected by the court. In this case, the court denied to disregard the legal form to glance at the economic substances. In the recent case of Hashem v. Shayif, it was held by justice Munby after considering many cases with respect to the lifting of corporate veil that, in order to pierce the corporate veil of a company the defendant should have total control over the company and there should be a presence of some kind of impropriety. [23] Although the argument of a single economic unit was rejected in the case of Adams V cape Industries, the case provided for an argument based on the rule of agency. The court in this case provided that agency not only mean a contractual relationship, but an agency arising out of facts. On the other hand, in the case of Hashem v. Shayif it can be concluded that justice Munby did not consider agency as an argument as he insisted on the term of impropriety[24]. In many instances the judges have also based their decisions on the concept of interest of justice whereas, justice Munby had rejected this approach. He provided that after analyzing several cases he found two factors to be present in each case, one was control and the other was impropriety, and the only case in which the court can lift the corporate veil is when there is existence of a faade. The arguments based on agency are not enough to lift the corporate veil because of the presence of impropriety[25]. The courts in most of the cases are unclear, when the phrase lifting the corporate veil is used by them. Prof. S. Ottolenghi in a seminal article in Modern Law Review (May 1990) divided judicial proceedings with respect to corporate veil into four types[26]: Peeping: This concept is used by the court only to determine the control of the defendant over the company. Penetrating: In this case, penetration is done in the corporate veil of a company to tie up liabilities on shareholders for the actions of the company or for giving the shareholders a direct interest with respect to the companys assets. This concept does not mean to provide that the company does not exist. It only provides that the shareholders are being directly looked at by the court because of the existence of certain factors. Extending: This approach is adopted by the courts in both factual agency and single economic unit arguments. This process involves piercing the corporate veil of one company and again reinforcing it to bring another company into the same veil. Ignoring: This concept involves eliminating the corporate veil of a company as a sham or a faade. After going through the decision of various cases, with respect the lifting of corporate veil it can be concluded that, there is an immense uncertainty in this aspect to law. The judges themselves are confused about the use of the doctrine of piercing the corporate veil. All cases provided with a different approach for this purpose and their no certainly and consistency at all between them. The courts, in spite of so many decisions, have not been able to identify a single, simple and clear approach in this field. Courts are making this doctrine more and more complicated by adopting a different approach to it in different cases. References: BOOKS Becker, Riaan. "Disregarding the separate juristic personality of a company: an English case law comparison." (2015). Chen, Chen.Piercing the Corporate Veil. Erasmus Universiteit, 2014. Lam, Chun Leung. "Piercing the Corporate Veil." (2015). Nelson, Josephine Sandler. "Frustration with the Intracorporate Conspiracy Doctrine Distorts Other Areas of Law."Available at SSRN 2581242(2015). Sharman, Jason Campbell. "Shell Companies and Asset Recovery: Piercing the Corporate Veil." (2014). JOURNAL ARTICLES Anderson, Helen. "Challenging the Limited Liability of Parent Companies: A Reform Agenda for Piercing the Corporate Veil."Australian Accounting Review22.2 (2012): 129-141. Booth, Richard A. "Close Encounters with Piercing the Corporate Veil."Vill. L. Rev.61 (2016): 393. Booth, Richard A. "Close Encounters with Piercing the Corporate Veil."Vill. L. Rev.61 (2016): 393. Butusina, Lorena. "Piercing the corporate veil."Revista Romana de Drept al Afacerilor8 (2013): 83. Farrar, John H. "Doctrinal incoherence and complex variables in piercing the corporate veil cases."Australian Journal of Corporate Law29 (2014): 23-37. Grantham, Ross. "Corporate Veil: An Ingenious Device, The."U. Queensland LJ32 (2013): 311. Hare, Christopher. "Family Division, 0; Chancery Division, 1: Piercing the Corporate Veil in the Supreme Court (Again)."The Cambridge Law Journal72.03 (2013): 511-515. Ho, May Kim. "Piercing the corporate veil as a last resort: Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd [2013] UKSC 34;[2013] 2 AC 415;[2013] 3 WLR 1."Singapore Academy of Law Journal26.1 (2014): 249. Khimji, Mohamed F., and Christopher C. Nicholls. "Piercing the Corporate Veil Reframed as Evasion and Concealment."UBCL Rev.48 (2015): 401. Kim, Ho May. "Piercing the Corporate Veil as a Last Resort; Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd."SAcLJ26 (2014): 249. Macey, Jonathan, and Joshua Mitts. "Finding order in the morass: The three real justifications for piercing the corporate veil."Cornell L. Rev.100 (2014): 99. Okoli, Chukwuma. "English courts address the potential convergence between the doctrines of piercing the corporate veil, party autonomy in jurisdiction agreements and privity of contract."Journal of Business Law(2014). Small, Rashied, Lucinda Smidt, and Achmad Joseph. "Piercing the corporate veil-separation of the business from the business owner: industry insights."Professional Accountant26 (2015): 24-25. Thompson, Sharon. "Behind the veil: Company or family property on divorce?."Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law36.2 (2014): 217-219. Tsang, King Fung. "The Elephant in the Room: An Empirical Study of Piercing the Corporate Veil in the Jurisdictional Context."Hastings Bus. LJ12 (2015): 185. CASE LAWS Adams V cape Industries [1991] 1 ALL ER 929 Macaura v Northern Assurance Co Ltd [1925] AC 619 Prest v. Petrodel Resources Ltd [2013] UKSC 34 Solomon v Solomon Co ltd [1896] UKHL 1 Suttons hospital (1612) 77 Eng Rep 960. Tunstall v Steigmann [1962] 2 QB 593 [1] Lam, Chun Leung. "Piercing the Corporate Veil." (2015). [2] Suttons hospital (1612) 77 Eng Rep 960. [3] Small, Rashied, Lucinda Smidt, and Achmad Joseph. "Piercing the corporate veil-separation of the business from the business owner: industry insights."Professional Accountant26 (2015): 24-25. [4] Macaura v Northern Assurance Co Ltd [1925] AC 619 [5] Solomon v Solomon Co ltd [1896] UKHL 1 [6] Tunstall v Steigmann [1962] 2 QB 593 [7] Macey, Jonathan, and Joshua Mitts. "Finding order in the morass: The three real justifications for piercing the corporate veil."Cornell L. Rev.100 (2014): 99. [8] Prest v. Petrodel Resources Ltd [2013] UKSC 34 [9] Ho, May Kim. "Piercing the corporate veil as a last resort: Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd [2013] UKSC 34;[2013] 2 AC 415;[2013] 3 WLR 1."Singapore Academy of Law Journal26.1 (2014): 249. [10] Thompson, Sharon. "Behind the veil: Company or family property on divorce?."Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law36.2 (2014): 217-219. [11] Booth, Richard A. "Close Encounters with Piercing the Corporate Veil."Vill. L. Rev.61 (2016): 393. [12] Okoli, Chukwuma. "English courts address the potential convergence between the doctrines of piercing the corporate veil, party autonomy in jurisdiction agreements and privity of contract."Journal of Business Law(2014). [13] Kim, Ho May. "Piercing the Corporate Veil as a Last Resort; Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd."SAcLJ26 (2014): 249. [14] Grantham, Ross. "Corporate Veil: An Ingenious Device, The."U. Queensland LJ32 (2013): 311. [15] Becker, Riaan. "Disregarding the separate juristic personality of a company: an English case law comparison." (2015). [16] Anderson, Helen. "Challenging the Limited Liability of Parent Companies: A Reform Agenda for Piercing the Corporate Veil."Australian Accounting Review22.2 (2012): 129-141. [17] Farrar, John H. "Doctrinal incoherence and complex variables in piercing the corporate veil cases."Australian Journal of Corporate Law29 (2014): 23-37. [18] Hare, Christopher. "Family Division, 0; Chancery Division, 1: Piercing the Corporate Veil in the Supreme Court (Again)."The Cambridge Law Journal72.03 (2013): 511-515. [19] Nelson, Josephine Sandler. "Frustration with the Intracorporate Conspiracy Doctrine Distorts Other Areas of Law."Available at SSRN 2581242(2015). [20] Butusina, Lorena. "Piercing the corporate veil."Revista Romana de Drept al Afacerilor8 (2013): 83. [21] Khimji, Mohamed F., and Christopher C. Nicholls. "Piercing the Corporate Veil Reframed as Evasion and Concealment."UBCL Rev.48 (2015): 401. [22] Adams V cape Industries [1991] 1 ALL ER 929 [23] Chen, Chen.Piercing the Corporate Veil. Erasmus Universiteit, 2014. [24] Lewis, Andrew. "Piercing the corporate veil has been extended: from the courts."Tax Breaks Newsletter327 (2013): 2-3. [25] Tsang, King Fung. "The Elephant in the Room: An Empirical Study of Piercing the Corporate Veil in the Jurisdictional Context."Hastings Bus. LJ12 (2015): 185. [26] Sharman, Jason Campbell. "Shell Companies and Asset Recovery: Piercing the Corporate Veil." (2014).