Scenario:
Moriarty had long since owned land in Old Town, through a company he owned, SafeSoil Ltd, which grew specialist, organic carrots on local farmland. It was run for Moriarty by an independent board of directors. Around 18-months ago, Hypershop plc, a large supermarket chain, purchased 100% of Safe-Soil Ltd shares. The management structure of Safe-Soil Ltd remained unchanged although, from that point, the company mainly supplied to Hypershop plc and shared some central resources with them. After the acquisition, Safe-Soil Ltd lost considerable amounts of money and, frustrated by their inability to control such a specialist business, Hypershop plc wound-up Safe-Soil Ltd three months ago. Recently some former workers have contracted chronic skin diseases as a result of negligent practices at Safe-Soil Ltd over a number of years
Question raised:
If they get into a dispute, can they avoid the dispute being taken to court?
My thoughts:
my understanding so far is that due to limited liability Moriarty cannot be held personally liable?
Also, HyperShop plc, following the principle in Thompson v Penwick cannot be held liable either?
My Question to You:
Could anyone confirm/expand on what I have understood of the question?