{"id":1432,"date":"2024-10-24T15:29:47","date_gmt":"2024-10-24T15:29:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/?p=1432"},"modified":"2025-03-12T16:27:07","modified_gmt":"2025-03-12T10:57:07","slug":"lee-v-lees-air-farming-ltd-case-summary","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/company-law\/lee-v-lees-air-farming-ltd-case-summary\/","title":{"rendered":"Lee v Lee\u2019s Air Farming Ltd. (1960) (Case Summary)"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t<div data-elementor-type=\"wp-post\" data-elementor-id=\"1432\" class=\"elementor elementor-1432\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<section class=\"elementor-section elementor-top-section elementor-element elementor-element-64adea8b elementor-section-full_width elementor-section-height-default elementor-section-height-default wpr-particle-no wpr-jarallax-no wpr-parallax-no wpr-sticky-section-no wpr-equal-height-no\" data-id=\"64adea8b\" data-element_type=\"section\" data-e-type=\"section\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-container elementor-column-gap-default\">\n\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-column elementor-col-100 elementor-top-column elementor-element elementor-element-28c81f8d\" data-id=\"28c81f8d\" data-element_type=\"column\" data-e-type=\"column\">\n\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-widget-wrap elementor-element-populated\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<section class=\"elementor-section elementor-inner-section elementor-element elementor-element-407e5f6f elementor-section-boxed elementor-section-height-default elementor-section-height-default wpr-particle-no wpr-jarallax-no wpr-parallax-no wpr-sticky-section-no wpr-equal-height-no\" data-id=\"407e5f6f\" data-element_type=\"section\" data-e-type=\"section\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-container elementor-column-gap-default\">\n\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-column elementor-col-100 elementor-inner-column elementor-element elementor-element-17b3409b\" data-id=\"17b3409b\" data-element_type=\"column\" data-e-type=\"column\">\n\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-widget-wrap elementor-element-populated\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-element elementor-element-78c86bc5 elementor-widget elementor-widget-heading\" data-id=\"78c86bc5\" data-element_type=\"widget\" data-e-type=\"widget\" data-widget_type=\"heading.default\">\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-widget-container\">\n\t\t\t\t\t<h1 class=\"elementor-heading-title elementor-size-default\">Lee v Lee\u2019s Air Farming Ltd. (Case Summary)<\/h1>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-element elementor-element-c83f84 elementor-widget elementor-widget-image\" data-id=\"c83f84\" data-element_type=\"widget\" data-e-type=\"widget\" data-widget_type=\"image.default\">\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-widget-container\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img fetchpriority=\"high\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"1312\" height=\"736\" src=\"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/Lee-v-Lees-Air-Farming-Ltd.-.jpg\" class=\"attachment-1536x1536 size-1536x1536 wp-image-1433\" alt=\"Lee v Lee\u2019s Air Farming Ltd.\" srcset=\"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/Lee-v-Lees-Air-Farming-Ltd.-.jpg 1312w, https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/Lee-v-Lees-Air-Farming-Ltd.--300x168.jpg 300w, https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/Lee-v-Lees-Air-Farming-Ltd.--1024x574.jpg 1024w, https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/Lee-v-Lees-Air-Farming-Ltd.--150x84.jpg 150w, https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/Lee-v-Lees-Air-Farming-Ltd.--768x431.jpg 768w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 1312px) 100vw, 1312px\" title=\"\">\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-element elementor-element-140d4835 elementor-widget elementor-widget-text-editor\" data-id=\"140d4835\" data-element_type=\"widget\" data-e-type=\"widget\" data-widget_type=\"text-editor.default\">\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-widget-container\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">This case, also known as the case of Lee v Lee, is a landmark case that strengthened the principle of separate legal entities of a company from its members. The case established a crucial precedent that even the promoters\/shareholders can be employees of the company.<\/span><\/p><div id=\"ez-toc-container\" class=\"ez-toc-v2_0_82_2 ez-toc-wrap-left counter-hierarchy ez-toc-counter ez-toc-custom ez-toc-container-direction\">\n<div class=\"ez-toc-title-container\">\n<p class=\"ez-toc-title\" style=\"cursor:inherit\">Table of Contents<\/p>\n<span class=\"ez-toc-title-toggle\"><a href=\"#\" class=\"ez-toc-pull-right ez-toc-btn ez-toc-btn-xs ez-toc-btn-default ez-toc-toggle\" aria-label=\"Toggle Table of Content\"><span class=\"ez-toc-js-icon-con\"><span class=\"\"><span class=\"eztoc-hide\" style=\"display:none;\">Toggle<\/span><span class=\"ez-toc-icon-toggle-span\"><svg style=\"fill: #000000;color:#000000\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" class=\"list-377408\" width=\"20px\" height=\"20px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" fill=\"none\"><path d=\"M6 6H4v2h2V6zm14 0H8v2h12V6zM4 11h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2zM4 16h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2z\" fill=\"currentColor\"><\/path><\/svg><svg style=\"fill: #000000;color:#000000\" class=\"arrow-unsorted-368013\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" width=\"10px\" height=\"10px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" version=\"1.2\" baseProfile=\"tiny\"><path d=\"M18.2 9.3l-6.2-6.3-6.2 6.3c-.2.2-.3.4-.3.7s.1.5.3.7c.2.2.4.3.7.3h11c.3 0 .5-.1.7-.3.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7zM5.8 14.7l6.2 6.3 6.2-6.3c.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7c-.2-.2-.4-.3-.7-.3h-11c-.3 0-.5.1-.7.3-.2.2-.3.5-.3.7s.1.5.3.7z\"\/><\/svg><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a><\/span><\/div>\n<nav><ul class='ez-toc-list ez-toc-list-level-1 ' ><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-1\" href=\"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/company-law\/lee-v-lees-air-farming-ltd-case-summary\/#Facts_of_Lee_v_Lees_Air_Farming_Ltd\" >Facts of Lee v Lee\u2019s Air Farming Ltd.<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-2\" href=\"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/company-law\/lee-v-lees-air-farming-ltd-case-summary\/#Issues_framed\" >Issues framed<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-3\" href=\"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/company-law\/lee-v-lees-air-farming-ltd-case-summary\/#Judgment_of_Lee_v_Lees_Air_Farming_Ltd\" >Judgment of Lee v Lee\u2019s Air Farming Ltd.<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/nav><\/div>\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Facts_of_Lee_v_Lees_Air_Farming_Ltd\"><\/span><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><b>Facts of Lee v Lee\u2019s Air Farming Ltd. <\/b><\/span><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2><ol><li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Mr. Lee established Lee\u2019s Air Farming ltd. having business in the niche area of Arial Topdressing i.e. (spreading fertilizer using aircraft)<\/span><\/li><li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Mr. Lee was not only the director but also the majority shareholder of the company.<\/span><\/li><li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The company took insurance of its employees from insurance agencies.<\/span><\/li><li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Mr. Lee was also a pilot and one day while flying the aircraft for Arial topdressing, the plane crashed and Mr. Lee was killed in the crash.\u00a0<\/span><\/li><li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Mrs. Lee (Appellant) claimed compensation under New Zealand Workers\u2019 Compensation Act, 1922. She contended that Lee was at the time of crash working as an employee of the company.\u00a0<\/span><\/li><li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The insurance agency contended that Mr. Lee being the majority shareholder can not be an employee of the company and a man can not employee himself.<\/span><\/li><\/ol><h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Issues_framed\"><\/span><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><b>Issues framed<\/b><\/span><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2><ol><li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Whether Mr. Lee being the majority shareholder, be an employee of the company?<\/span><\/li><li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Whether Mrs. Lee is entitled to compensation under New Zealand Workers\u2019 Compensation Act, 1922? <\/span><\/li><\/ol><h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Judgment_of_Lee_v_Lees_Air_Farming_Ltd\"><\/span><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><b>Judgment of Lee v Lee\u2019s Air Farming Ltd.<br \/><\/b><\/span><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2><p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The court analyzed the principles of common law and the extent to which the doctrine of a company as a separate legal entity from its shareholders can be applied. The court also considered the New Zealand Workers\u2019 Compensation Act, 1922<\/span><\/p><p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The court while interpreting the doctrine of separate legal entity did a strict legal interpretation of the doctrine and held that a shareholder is a separate legal entity than the company and hence, even a majority shareholder can be an employee of the company. The court held that Mr. Lee was indeed an employee of the company Lee Air Farming Ltd. <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><br \/><\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><br \/><\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Mr. Lee even after being the majority shareholder was held to be an employee of the company and hence, was entitled to compensation under the New Zealand Workers Compensation Act, 1922.<\/span><\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-element elementor-element-40ecbe3f elementor-widget elementor-widget-pdfjs-viewer\" data-id=\"40ecbe3f\" data-element_type=\"widget\" data-e-type=\"widget\" data-widget_type=\"pdfjs-viewer.default\">\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-widget-container\">\n\t\t\t\t\t<iframe width=\"\" height=\"700\" src=\"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-content\/plugins\/pdfjs-viewer-for-elementor\/\/assets\/js\/pdfjs\/web\/viewer.html?file=\"><\/iframe>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/section>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/section>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>This case, also known as the case of Lee v Lee, is a landmark case that strengthened the principle of separate legal entities of a company from its members. The case established a crucial precedent<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":1433,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"","ast-site-content-layout":"default","site-content-style":"default","site-sidebar-style":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","ast-disable-related-posts":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","astra-migrate-meta-layouts":"default","ast-page-background-enabled":"default","ast-page-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"ast-content-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[9],"tags":[26],"class_list":["post-1432","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-company-law","tag-companies-act"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1432","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1432"}],"version-history":[{"count":29,"href":"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1432\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4425,"href":"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1432\/revisions\/4425"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1433"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1432"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1432"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1432"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}