there are two circumstances under which the zimbabwean courts can lift the corporate veil. the first form is judicial evasion and he other one is statutory evasion.
JUDICIAL EVASION
this takes tree forms which is:
Federal courts have the ability to overturn state and local practices
Courts should have thoroughly investigated the evidence, held those responsible accountable, and imposed appropriate penalties to deter future corporate fraud.
'Setting a precedent' is similar to saying 'setting the standard'. When a court (with a large jurisdiction) rules a certain away, they set a standard that forces the lower courts to make similar rulings for similar circumstances.
Piercing the corporate veil is when a company is shown to be corrupt, and engaged in injurious activities. This was the case of a Kenyan Pipeline Company explosion and fire that killed 120 people, and injured hundreds of others. The company was found to be grossly negligent in their operations, an a subsequent lawsuit was filed by victims and their families.
There are several courts to which an appeal may be made, depending on the circumstances. The following site contains a discussion:
Piercing the corporate veil in legal cases involving corporate liability is difficult because courts typically respect the separate legal entity of a corporation. To do so, plaintiffs must prove that the corporation was used improperly or fraudulently to avoid legal obligations.
An arbitrator's decision and award can typically be appealed to the courts only in limited circumstances, such as if there was misconduct or bias on the part of the arbitrator, or if the decision violates public policy.
Depending on circumstances ie. previous good behaviour, mitigating circumstances, admission of guilt and full apology and full co-operation with law enforcement and the courts. But yes it is possible.
No. The US District Courts are trial courts (original jurisdiction) of general jurisdiction under most circumstances, although they do occasionally hear appeals of federal departmental decisions made by Administrative Law Judges.
Copyright infringement is itself a crime; typically handled in civil courts, it can be moved to criminal courts in extreme cases. Depending on the circumstances, infringement may involve theft, illegal importation, invasion of privacy, or wire fraud.
The circumstances under which one would have to testify in court will vary according to the jurisdiction. In the English courts a witness needs to be cross examined, so that if their testimony is key to the case, they can be subpoenaed. This compels them to attend court and testify.
For injury/abuse to an animal an arrest warrant will be issued by the courts for animal cruelty with respect given to any mitigating circumstances associated with the crime .