DOCTRINE OF VICARIOUS LIABILITY. Evolution: During the early period of the Anglo-Norman period, when the act is done with the consent or command of the master the liability of the wrongs of the servant is changed to the liability of the master. It is generally applicable to civil cases and exceptionally it is applicable to criminal cases. Under English law, the state cannot be liable to the wrong committed by its servant. It is based on the principle of Rex nonpotest-peccare which means the king cannot do any wrong.

DOCTRINE OF LIFTING THE CORPORATE VEIL. Evolution: The doctrine of lifting the corporate veil has been traced from 1877 in the case Saloman V. Saloman & Co. Ltd., (1897) A.C. 22. From 1897 to 1966, this doctrine has experimented with different approaches. Later, from 1966 to 1989 the rules laid down in Salomon’s case encouraged the doctrine of lifting the corporate veil. The doctrine of corporate veil is the principle of common law which has its applicability in India.

EVOLUTION: The doctrine of privity of contract is traced and established in the case, Tweddle V. Aktinston., 30 LJ QB 218, at the end of the 16th century in India. Before this case, there has been a difference of opinion displayed in the judgment of the court how far the rights of strangers can be enforced. Later, the rule in the case is applicable in India as it is in England. The doctrine of privity of contract is a principle of the common law.

In India, the application of Doctrine of Promissory Estoppel can be traced in two stages, Pre Anglo-Afghan Case and post Anglo-Afghan Case. Before the case, the doctrine is not applied to the Government. In the case Union of India V. AngloAfghan Agencies (1968) 2 S.C.R 366., the Government of India announces concession in the import of raw materials to promote export. Subsequently, the partial concession was granted. Therefore, the government was estopped by its promise. Therefore, the Doctrine of Promissory Estoppel invoked against the Government.