Simply answer the following questions: (no references) (personal points or personal readings is fine)

1. Recognise instances where a company's separate personality will be ignored

2. To what extent will the law lift the veil of incorporation to reveal the realities of the corporate structure?

3. Are there any countervailing factors that might render a court reluctant to hold directors negligent in running their company?

4. Is it enough for directors to prove that they acted for what they regarded as the good of the company?

5. Are the "bona fide" and "proper purpose" doctrines really two separate doctrines or one?

6. How does the court decide whether a director's action has been "in the best interests of the company"?

7. Both directors and the shareholders in General Meeting (when voting to alter articles) have to act "in the best interests of the company". Does this phrase mean the same in both contexts?

8. Are directors' "fiduciary duties" best regarded as "directors' disabilities"?