3 ms·
Almost all countries do this, because accountability is a necessary tradeoff for the huge benefits of limited liability. (The UK has basically one exception, f
by pjc50 2y ago
Almost all countries do this, because accountability is a necessary tradeoff for the huge benefits of limited liability.
(The UK has basically one exception, for Huntingdon Life Sciences, after their directors were subject to an extremely intense harrasment campaign by animal rights activists)
- kevincox 2y agoYes, but if you want to hold someone accountable you should take them to court where it can be fairly decided, not show up at their home address.
- pclmulqdq 2y agoYou need their address to have a reliable way to take them to court.
- arresin 2y agoYou can ask the government
- pclmulqdq 2y agoI can imagine nothing wrong with having the government gatekeep access to the ability to sue corporations.
- LadyCailin 2y agoThey.. already do? Who do you think “the judiciary” is?
- pclmulqdq 2y agoThe referee, not the ticket counter.
- kevincox 2y agoYes, this sounds like the root cause. Maybe we should have a way to take someone to court that doesn't rely on knowing their address (and ideally is more stable over time than an address, and less ambiguous if there are multiple people with the same name at the same address).
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- andrewaylett 2y agoYou need to put a correspondence address, but it doesn't need to be a home address — most reasonably-sized companies will allow directors to use the company address, or the address of their law firm, instead. That doesn't work so well for companies that run out of the directors' homes, of course. You can see the correspondence addresses for the former directors of Huntingdon Life Sciences in their record at Companies House: https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/03126711 https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/c...