In the case of Gilford Motor Co Ltd v Horne, which of the following statements is untrue?

Group of answer choices

Hornes company was held to be subject to the same contractual provisions as Horne was himself

The decision in Gilford Motor Co Ltd v Horne was overruled by the Supreme Court in Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd

Hornes company was held by the court to be a sham company

The case is an example of piercing the veil of incorporation

What is meant by lifting the "veil of incorporation"? (Tick all that apply)

Group of answer choices

The separation of the personality of the company from its members is not to be maintained

Ignoring the fact that an act has been performed by a company the courts may look at the actions of the company officers.

An artificial person is not capable of doing anything illegal or fraudulent

Where a company may have been formed to avoid a legal liability, the courts may look at the true intention of those involved.

How do Dignam & Lowry interpret veil lifting? Tick all that apply

Group of answer choices

The Salomon era

Back to basics (1989 - present)

Interventionist period (1966-1989)

Classic era (1897-1966)

The judgment in Salomon v A Salomon Co Ltd dominated during the classic period

Group of answer choices

True

False