The courts have stated repeatedly that where a company is a sham, or is used to perpetrate a fraud or evade a contractual obligation, then that companys corporate personality will be set aside. Prest has confirmed this by stating that the only instances in which the courts can pierce the veil is where a person is under an existing legal obligation or liability or subject to an existing legal restriction which he deliberately evades or whose enforcement he deliberately frustrates by interposing a company under his control Petrodel Resources Ltd v Prest (2013).

Evaluate this statement making reference to examples taken from legislation and case law