Taxi Driver Online

Somewhere in the mire this site has become with all the puerile shecht being posted, I understand that two writs have been issued.

The first allegedly against Central, the second allegedly against one of its officers.

Now, I do not know what the object of the two writs is, I've heard it is based on a letter sent to Chamber of Commerce members by a Company officer (I can't be bothered to dig through the mire) and purporting to come from the Company.

As far as I can gather, any act by a Company officer, acting in his position as an officer on behalf of the Company, leaves the Company itself responsible for its actions. There is no real prospect of pursuing the individual personally.

I offer the following, which although not UK based, probably is closely aligned.

http://www.grosman.com/publications/emp ... orate-veil

I suggest that the additional personal writ is merely a legal tactic, designed to cause confusion in the opposing ranks (ref: The Art of war - Sun Tzu).

In any case, it would appear that citing the individual personally is little more than a tactical ploy to intimidate and stimulate reaction favourable to the pursuer - for example capitulation by the individual to precipitate the action against the real target - the competitor company.

So, it would appear that the individual is protected from this pursuit, and the Company will bear the brunt of the action. In the case being mooted, because the evidence appears to be slam dunk, this would appear to add up to a considerable financial penalty.

However, it seems not to end there. Because the individual Company officer is required in law to obey certain rules and standards. And if his actions fall below those standards then he may well be subject to criminal proceedings. Also, if he is found guilty of having breached that code of standards, then he would be liable to pursuit from the Company which he purported to represent. Any financial penalty incurred by them could be passed on to the errant Company Officer.

In the case we're led to believe has now become the subject of specific writs, the pursuer looks set to exact retribution on the Company, and if the Company survives this procedure, note "if", then it in turn will pursue the errant Company officer.

Someone is certainly going to be on the end of a serious stiffing here.



It seems there was always going to be a settling of scores here. It was just a matter of time. And the opportunity has now been presented.

_________________
Skull, "You are a police inspector, aren't you?"
Cab Inspector Smith, "Yes."
Skull, "So, are you going to tell Mr Taylor what his rights are?"
Smith, "And ... What rights?"