Salomon v A Salomon & Co Ltd
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
The House of Lords held that a company formed by a trader and six family members to acquire his business, with all statutory requirements satisfied, is validly incorporated under the Companies Act 1862. The company is a separate legal entity, not the vendor's alias or agent. The vendor owes no duty to indemnify the company against debts to unsecured creditors, and there was no fraud upon creditors or shareholders warranting rescission of the sale agreement. The judgments of the High Court and Court of Appeal were reversed.
Outcome
Appeal allowed and cross-appeal dismissed. Matter remitted to the Chancery Division.
Facts
Aron Salomon carried on a prosperous boot and shoe manufacturing business. In July 1892, he transferred his solvent business to a limited company, A Salomon and Company Limited, formed by himself, his wife, daughter, and four sons, each subscribing for one share. The company adopted the sale agreement, and Salomon received 20,000 fully paid shares, £10,000 in debentures, and approximately £1,000 in cash as purchase price. The debentures formed a floating security. All shareholders knew and approved the sale terms and all statutory requirements were met. The company later encountered financial difficulties, went into liquidation, and after satisfying the debentures held by a third party (to whom Salomon had transferred them to raise funds for the company), insufficient assets remained to pay unsecured creditors. The liquidator brought a counter-claim alleging fraud and seeking indemnity from Salomon against the company's debts.
Issues
- Whether a company consisting only of a trader and six members of his family, formed to acquire his business, is validly incorporated under the Companies Act 1862.
- Whether such a company is contrary to the true intent and meaning of the Companies Act 1862.
- Whether the vendor of the business is liable to indemnify the company against claims by unsecured creditors.
- Whether the contract for the sale of the business to the company should be rescinded on the grounds of fraud.
Orders
- Appeal allowed.
- Order of the Court of Appeal reversed.
- Cross-appeal dismissed with costs.
- Cause remitted to the Chancery Division.
- Costs in the House of Lords to be taxed as appropriate for a pauper litigant.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (4)
Cases cited (15)
- Reg v Arnand (1846) 9 Q.B. 806
- In re Ambrose Lake Tin and Copper Mining Co (1880) 14 Ch. D. 390
- In re British Seamless Paper Box Co (1881) 17 Ch. D. 467
- Farrar v Farrars, Limited (1888) 40 Ch. D. 395
- North-West Transportation Co v Beatty (1887) 12 App. Cas. 589
- In re National Debenture and Assets Corporation [1891] 2 Ch. 505
- In re George Newman & Co [1895] 1 Ch. 674
- Erlanger v New Sombrero Phosphate Co (1878) 3 App. Cas. 1218
- Adam v Newbigging (1888) 13 App. Cas. 308
- Western Bank of Scotland v Addie (1867) L.R. 1 H.L., Sc. 145
- Clarke v Dickson (1858) E.B. & E. 148
- Ex parte Cowen (1867) L.R. 2 Ch. 563
- In re Smith (1890) 25 Q.B.D. 536
- Broderip v Salomon [1895] 2 Ch. 323
- In re Baglan Hall Colliery Co (L.R. 5 Ch. 340)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.