26 April 2013 / Rod Cowper , Michael Twomey

Issue: 7557 / Categories: Features , Commercial

printer

mail-detail

Who pulls the strings?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

hires2

Rod Cowper & Michael Twomey study the latest approach to piercing the veil

The Supreme Court in VTB Capital plc v Nutritek International Corp [2013] UKSC 5, [2013] 1 All ER 1296 decisively rejected the suggestion that a person who controls a company can be made liable as a party to a contract entered into by that company. However, although the Supreme Court declined the opportunity for a more general review of the corporate veil doctrine, the doctrine did not emerge unscathed.

Facts of VTB

VTB lent Russagroprom LLC (RAP) US$225m for RAP to buy Russian dairy companies from Nutritek International Corp. The facility agreement contained an English Court jurisdiction clause. Nutritek’s shareholders were two BVI companies, both owned and controlled by Mr Malofeev (M), a Russian businessman.

RAP defaulted and VTB believed its security was only worth US$32m to US$40m. It claimed that it was induced to enter into the agreement by fraudulent misrepresentations made by Nutritek for which the BVI companies and M were jointly and severally liable. VTB wished

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content

If you are already a subscriber sign in

...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

Who pulls the strings?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

hires2

Rod Cowper & Michael Twomey study the latest approach to piercing the veil

The Supreme Court in VTB Capital plc v Nutritek International Corp [2013] UKSC 5, [2013] 1 All ER 1296 decisively rejected the suggestion that a person who controls a company can be made liable as a party to a contract entered into by that company. However, although the Supreme Court declined the opportunity for a more general review of the corporate veil doctrine, the doctrine did not emerge unscathed.

Facts of VTB

VTB lent Russagroprom LLC (RAP) US$225m for RAP to buy Russian dairy companies from Nutritek International Corp. The facility agreement contained an English Court jurisdiction clause. Nutritek’s shareholders were two BVI companies, both owned and controlled by Mr Malofeev (M), a Russian businessman.

RAP defaulted and VTB believed its security was only worth US$32m to US$40m. It claimed that it was induced to enter into the agreement by fraudulent misrepresentations made by Nutritek for which the BVI companies and M were jointly and severally liable. VTB wished

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content

If you are already a subscriber sign in

...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

SourceURL:

Links:

E-newsletter Sign-Up

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Switalskis—Naila Arif, Harriet Findlay & Ellie Thompson

Switalskis—Naila Arif, Harriet Findlay & Ellie Thompson

Firm awards training contracts to paralegals through internal programme

Ward Hadaway—Matthew Morton

Ward Hadaway—Matthew Morton

Private client disputes specialist joins commercial litigation team

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Nina Hood

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Nina Hood

Cumbria firm appoints new head of residential property

NEWS

NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders

Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners

NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do

A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent

NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed

Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’

NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits

A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’

NLJ this week: Family law urged to ditch adversarial instincts

Family law must shift from conflict-driven litigation to child-centred problem-solving, according to a major new report. Writing in NLJ this week, Caroline Bowden of Anthony Gold outlines findings showing overwhelming support for reform, with 92% agreeing lawyers owe duties to children as well as clients

back-to-top-scroll