Piercing the corporate veil for environmental torts in Mauritius: a comparative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The corporate veil or veil of incorporation is a legal concept that separates the legal and juristic personality of a company from its members, directors and other stakeholders. Indeed, common law has provided for numerous circumstances in which the corporate veil of a company may be lifted, and courts rely on these case law precedents to determine the grounds for lifting the corporate veil. However, there is limited case law regarding environmental torts as a ground for lifting the veil of incorporation and there is no legal provision in Mauritius which recognises environmental crimes as an exception to corporate veil. Consequently, this paper aims to discuss the liability of decision-makers of a company in the case of corporate environmental wrongdoings and thereafter, to present a case for amending Mauritius laws to give recognition to environmental torts as a ground of lifting the corporate veil. Design/methodology/approach This paper has adopted the black-letter approach and the comparative research methodology. The laws of Mauritius on corporate veil will be compared to the related laws of the USA and Canada with the view of seeking recommendations for Mauritius, as these countries are known to have an extensive legal framework on environmental crimes as a ground to lift the corporate veil. Findings It is concluded that it is high time for Mauritius to adopt a separate manslaughter law that would incorporate crimes committed to the environment by corporate bodies as a ground for lifting the corporate veil and thereby attacking individual stakeholders concerned. Originality/value This study is among the first researches conducted in the field of environmental torts as a ground for lifting the corporate veil in Mauritius.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".