Why did fujitsu institute legal action against schenker and not mr lerama?
Question: Why did fujitsu institute legal action against schenker and not mr lerama?
Fujitsu Institute may have taken legal action against Schenker instead of Mr Lerama for a number of reasons.
- Vicarious liability: Schenker may be vicariously liable for Mr Lerama's actions. Vicarious liability is a legal doctrine that holds that an employer can be held liable for the tortious acts of its employees, even if the employer did not authorize or encourage the employee's actions. This is because the employer is considered to be in control of its employees and their actions.
- Agency: Schenker may be considered to be Mr Lerama's agent. An agent is a person who acts on behalf of another person, known as the principal. An agent can bind the principal to contracts and other agreements. If Schenker is considered to be Mr Lerama's agent, then Schenker may be liable for Mr Lerama's actions.
- Corporate veil: Fujitsu Institute may have wanted to avoid piercing the corporate veil. The corporate veil is a legal concept that protects the assets of a corporation from the personal assets of its shareholders. Piercing the corporate veil is a legal process that allows a court to hold the shareholders of a corporation personally liable for the corporation's debts and liabilities. Fujitsu Institute may have been concerned that if it sued Mr Lerama directly, it could be successful in obtaining a judgment against him, but that it would be difficult to collect on the judgment if Mr Lerama did not have the assets to pay it. By suing Schenker instead, Fujitsu Institute may have been able to obtain a judgment against Schenker, which is a more solvent entity.
It is also possible that Fujitsu Institute simply wanted to send a message to Schenker that it was serious about enforcing its rights. By suing Schenker, Fujitsu Institute may have been hoping to deter Schenker from engaging in similar conduct in the future.
Ultimately, only Fujitsu Institute knows why it chose to sue Schenker instead of Mr Lerama. However, the reasons discussed above are some of the possible explanations.
0 Komentar
Post a Comment