Practice question
Assets were validly foreclosed and sold before the particular employee claims arose, with no fraudulent anticipation or other wrongful scheme proved. Is chronology irrelevant when alleging an asset transfer designed to evade those claims?
- No; Maricalum treats the timing and lawful basis as material
- Yes; every earlier transfer conclusively proves later evasion
- Yes; lawful foreclosure is automatically fraud
- Yes; all purchasers are identical to sellers
- Yes; all separate personalities disappear after foreclosure
Legal references
- Maricalum Mining v Florentino GR221813 July23,2018 MAIN: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2018/jul2018/gr_221813_2018.html Transaction-specific domination and Nell asset-transfer exceptions.
- Kukan International v Reyes GR182729 September29,2010 MAIN: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/sep2010/gr_182729_2010.html Jurisdiction and due process distinct from veil-piercing liability.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.