This paper offers a structural tool for examining various parental liability approaches for the externalities of its subsidiaries, meaning in the context of this paper, the negative environmental impact of their operations. In order to conclude that the parent is liable for externalities of subsidiaries, one must be able to bypass the corporate privileges of separate legal personality and limited liability, either within traditional company law or within alternative approaches offered by notably tort and environmental law. The overall acceptance of companies within groups as single entities, instead of recognition of their factual, often closely interlinked economic relationship, is a well-known barrier within traditional company law. The situation is exacerbated by the general lack of an extraterritorial liability approach and of enforcement of the rare occurrences of such liability within the traditional company law context. This paper explores various liability approaches found in jurisdictions worldwide mainly based on mapping papers from the international Sustainable Companies Project. The author introduces a matrix in order to systemize the different approaches, distinguishing between three levels: domestic and extraterritorial, statutory and judicial and indirect and direct liability. A proper distinction between the different liability approaches can be valuable in order to identify the main barriers to group liability in regulation and in jurisprudence.

Limited liability is one of the cornerstones of company law. This is also the case where companies form part of a group of companies with one controlling holding company. In South African law, as in most jurisdictions, there are exceptions to limited liability. These exceptions usually lead to the piercing of the veil between the company and its shareholders. In New Zealand company law the legislature has introduced measures to enable courts to consolidate or pool together the assets and liabilities of companies within a group in cases of liquidation of one/all of the companies in the group of companies. This article investigates whether South African company law should consider introducing these New Zealand measures into South African company law to better protect creditors of the liquidated company. The article concludes that the New Zealand measures could serve as a useful presumption to enable courts to consolidate assets and liabilities within a group of companies in cases of liquidation of one or all the companies in the group.