Since the Industrial Revolution, when corporations came to power, the boundaries of a legal entity have been the subject of constant debate. While granting personality can help hold companies legally accountable for their actions, it also opens the door to many more complex issues. For example, if a company has a personality distinct from its shareholders or owners, some argue that it should also have individual rights such as voting rights. However, when voting rights are granted, shareholders are actually entitled to vote twice: once as an individual and once in the personality of the company. Since this conflicts with most electoral systems, it remains a controversial issue in legal circles. I could sue the manager of a fast food restaurant if I slipped and fell in his restaurant, but the fast food company as a separate “person” did not contribute to my accident. I could take legal action to discriminate against a company because it is a corporation. Partly on the basis of the principle that corporations are simply organizations of natural persons, and partly on the basis of the history of the legal interpretation of the word “person,” the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that certain constitutional rights protect corporations (such as corporations and other organizations).
Santa Clara County, V. Southern Pacific Railroad is sometimes cited for this conclusion because the court reporter`s comments included a statement by the Chief Justice made before the hearing began, telling counsel during the pre-trial conference that “the court does not wish to hear arguments as to whether the provision of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution prohibiting a State from denying a person within its jurisdiction the The same protection of the law applies to these organizations. We all agree that this is the case. In the common law tradition, only one person could have legal rights. In order for them to work, the legal personality of a company has been established to include five legal rights: the right to a common treasure or safe (including the right to property), the right to a corporate seal (i.e. the right to conclude and sign contracts), the right to sue (to enforce contracts). the right to hire agents (employees) and the right to enact laws (self-government). [19] The term “pessoa jurídica” in Portuguese) is used in case law to designate a legal person with rights and obligations, which also has legal personality.
Its regulations are largely based on the Brazilian Civil Code, where it is clearly recognized and defined, among other things. The attribution of legal personality has long been associated with the fact that a person or organization may have the same or similar status as a human being. When the United States was involved in slavery, slaves were denied the right to legal personality. This meant that they could not vote, file complaints, marry legally, or enjoy any of the rights granted by the U.S. Constitution. Women, Native Americans, and other minority groups were often classified into similar categories. By denying these groups this designation, the state effectively denied that they were human, just as white men were considered human. Not all organizations have legal personality. For example, directors of a corporation, legislature or government agency are generally not legal entities because they do not have the ability to exercise legal rights independently of the corporation or political body to which they belong. In 2010, the U.S.
Supreme Court issued a decision that many legal scholars call a victory for corporate rights. The decision to dismiss Citizens United v. The Federal Election Committee expanded companies` freedom of expression by declaring it unconstitutional to prohibit corporations from participating in election expenses and campaigns. While critics see this decision as tantamount to allowing corporate-sponsored applicants in the future, proponents argue that it is unfair to grant legal personality that grants equal responsibilities but not equal rights. Since legal personality is a prerequisite for legal capacity (the capacity of any legal person to modify (conclude, transfer, etc.) its rights and obligations), it is a prerequisite for an international organization to be able to sign international treaties in its own name. In some common law legal systems, a distinction is made between a corporation (e.g., a corporation with a number of members) and a corporation, which is a public office with separate legal personality from the person exercising the function (both entities have separate legal personality). Historically, most bodies have been exclusively ecclesiastical in nature (for example, the office of Archbishop of Canterbury is a single body), but a number of other public functions are now formed as single bodies. Section 28 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 states: ” the provisions of this Bill of Rights apply, to the extent possible, for the benefit of all legal persons and all natural persons. The other case where a legal entity becomes a significant issue is when the entity in question is not a human being but a corporation, partnership or corporation.