With regard to the obligations of legal persons, the articles of association of each company serve as a reference for the acts of persons who, as representatives of that legal person, perform (or violate) certain obligations. This situation, known as a `fictitious attribution`27, makes it possible to consider the legal person as linked to a debt. In case law, the word “personality” has several meanings. In fact, the legal entity confers certain legal rights and obligations on the subject in a particular jurisdiction, such as entering into contracts, indebtedness of property, taking on debt, etc. Legal personality is a prerequisite for legal capacity, the ability of any legal person to modify (conclude, transfer, etc.) its rights and obligations. Legal experts have divided the study of commercial law into four main areas: (a) persons (natural and legal); (b) undertakings; (c) legal instruments facilitating relations between the first two groups; and (d) administrative and judicial proceedings. In Mexican commercial law, there is no provision defining legal personality, although this term is used, especially in adjectival or procedural aspects. In this way, legal decisions on legal personality generally do so with regard to the conditions that must be met in order for a person to be able to intervene in a particular act or transaction.46 49 If conferred rights of action, the legal person “nature” would become one of the few non-human entities equipped in this way (ships, All companies and trusts can currently sue). Proponents of natural entity rights argue that allowing nature to sue on its own would mean that more individuals who previously escaped responsibility would face penalties for their destructive behavior and would be a clear plaintiff in cases of environmental destruction. This would avoid the problem faced by environmentalists in the United States, who have to argue that they themselves are harmed because they cannot see a rare animal in order to prevent the destruction of its habitat. 15In Louisiana, courts required a cost-benefit analysis for each potentially environmentally harmful action and ordered the government to take the least harmful action.31 In Supplemental Fuels, Inc.32, for example, an appeals court emphasized that the state Department of Environmental Quality has a “constitutional mandate to determine that adverse environmental impacts are, to the extent possible, compatible with the public. were minimized or avoided.

Welfare. 33 47Environmentalists may fear that the legal personality of nature will inevitably have to be defended by man. When these people are appointed by the government, environmental concerns are not always paramount. All custodians are responsible for developing a management plan and deciding which specific activities should be allowed. In theory, environmental authorities already assume this responsibility with respect to public lands and protected areas. It is unclear to what extent the shift in perspective will take place if the focus is on the region rather than the people. 13Other provisions are less direct than based on aspects of the doctrine of public trust, such as conservation and general use.26 Rhode Island`s constitutional amendment, added in 1986, emphasizes public access and use rights, coupled with a legislative mandate: 41The animal rights movement believes that the legal status of animals needs to be changed. On an ethical basis, the claim is that animals, like humans, have personal interests such as the prevention of pain and death and as such should have legal personality so that they can assert these interests directly in the legal system. Currently and historically, animals are classified by the legal system as personal property. An unsuccessful lawsuit by PETA against Sea World sought to free a certain killer whale captured in the wild, which the group compared to a human slave (held against its will), under the legal theory that the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which prohibits human slavery, also prohibits the slavery of whales.[102] Everyone has the right to all rights and freedoms. set out in this statement. without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

Furthermore, no distinction may be made on the basis of the political, judicial or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it is an independent, fiduciary, non-self-governing country or any other limitation of sovereignty. If the legal person is mentioned in the legislation, this is usually done negatively; that is, in relation to the absence or loss of personality. This suggests that people would have to prove the existence of this element in order to take certain legal action. The German lawyer40 Serick is recognized as a pioneer in case law by systematically analyzing previous court decisions. The doctrine of penetration of the corporate veil has its origin in American law as the theory of disrespect41 or the doctrine of corporate contempt.42 Powell,43 in turn, defined this theory as “the removal of the legal person of a corporation in a given case in order to reach the natural or legal persons behind the same and the underlying economic reality to apply the substantive law, that is relevant to the specific situation. 44 The legal capacity of natural persons (natural persons) and their differences. This is based, on the one hand, on the legal capacity of natural persons, which is defined in the statutes of the association. On the other hand, it includes the study of facilities intended to compensate for the deficiencies of natural persons. Realist theories: Note that legal entities, both private and public, are real. As such, rights include not only human beings, but any being who has his own will and life.

According to this thought, a society exists as an objectively real entity and the law merely recognizes its existence and gives effect to it. Therefore, the law cannot create entities, but only recognize them. These theories include “organismism”21, the collective theory of the soul,22 and the theory of the social organism.23 According to the general law of economic societies, another characteristic concerns the free will of the commercial entity. However, this free will relates to the activity of the legal person itself and is reflected in legal relationships created or created as a result of acts of will that necessarily give rise to subjective rights and obligations. In other economic laws,47 the term legal person is used to refer to the fact that certain state-owned entities that regulate business transactions have a legal person, although these laws do not specify what this means. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; This right includes freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom, alone or in community with others, publicly or privately, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and rites. 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 this article, we analyze several theories that attempt to explain “legal entity” as it applies to companies. These include the theory of affectation, the theory of the apparent subject, the atomistic theory of the state, the theory of fiction, the theory of legal action, and the theory of the corporate veil. 23A number of different factors have been proposed as the basis for such legal status.53 Traits used individually or in combination include: biological life, genetic humanity, brain development, pain perception, awareness/sensitivity, communication ability, relationship-making ability, superior reasoning, and rationality. According to the eminent legal philosopher Joel Feinberg, an entity must have interests in order to have moral status.54 Capricorn adds that “interests” are an art term that refers to an entity`s ability to have a share in things, and this ability depends on whether the entity is sentient or conscious.55 “Interests” in this sense refers to an entity the “own good or well-being” and “expression.

aims to emphasize the interest of conscious and sentient beings for their own well-being. 56 Where an entity has no interests within the meaning referred to above, legal personality cannot be based on the protection of those interests for itself.