DHN Food Distributors Ltd v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council [1976]

DHN Food Distributors Ltd v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council [1976]

DHN Food Distributors Ltd v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council [1976] 1 WLR 852 is a UK company law case where, on the basis that a company should be compensated for loss of its business under a compulsory acquisition order, a group was recognised as a single economic entity. It stands as a liberal example of when UK courts may lift the veil of incorporation of a company.

DHN imported groceries and provision and had a cash-and-carry grocery business. Its premises were owned by its subsidiary called Bronze. Another wholly owned subsidiary, DHN Food Transport Ltd, owned the vehicles. In 1970, Tower Hamlets London Borough Council compulsorily acquired the premises to build houses. Compensation was paid to Bronze, DHN's subsidiary, for the land, but DHN sought compensation for the loss of its business.

The Court of Appeal held that DHN and Bronze were part of a single economic entity. Lord Denning MR's judgment stated that if the firm and its property had been in one ownership, compensation would have been payable for the value of the land and disturbance due to business closure. The court concluded that DHN, as the parent company, was entitled to compensation for the loss of business, lifting the corporate veil.

DHN argued it had an equitable interest in the land, suggesting a resulting trust situation. The court, however, was not fully convinced. DHN asserted an irrevocable license based on the complex conveyancing transactions. The court accepted that DHN, being the parent company, had a sufficient interest in the land to qualify for compensation for disturbance. The court considered lifting the corporate veil, treating the group of three companies as one economic entity. The court emphasised the control exercised by DHN over its subsidiaries and the economic reality of the situation. It ruled that DHN was entitled to claim compensation without going through a conveyancing device.

The court rejected the technical argument put forth by the acquiring authority. Despite admitting that the group could have structured the ownership differently, the court emphasised the economic reality and the unjust denial of compensation due to technicalities in company law.

In conclusion, the court allowed the appeal, recognising the economic unity of the group and lifting the corporate veil. This case serves as a notable example of the court's willingness to look beyond the strict legal forms of ownership to achieve a just outcome, especially in cases involving the compensation for loss of business under compulsory acquisition orders.
Back to blog
UOL Case Bank

UOL Case Bank

Upon joining, you become a valuable UOL student and gain instant access to over 2,100 case summaries. UOL Case Bank is constantly expanding. Speed up your revision with us now.

Subscribe Now

Where are our students from?

Yale University
Council of Europe
Baker Mckenzie 
University of Chicago
Columbia University
New York University
University of Michigan 
University College London (UCL)
London School of Economics (LSE)
King’s College London (KCL)
University of London
University of Manchester
University of Zurich
University of York
Brandeis University
University of Exeter
University of Sheffield
Boston University
University of Washington
University of Leeds
University of Law
Royal Holloway, University of London 
Birkbeck, University of London
SOAS, University of London
University of Kent
University of Hull
Queen’s University Belfast
Toronto Metropolitan University
Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
University of Buckingham

  • Criminal Practice

    Diagrams and Charts

    Our carefully designed diagrams and charts will guide you through complex legal issues.

  • Criminal Law

    Clear and Succinct Definitions

    Key concepts are concisely defined to help you understand legal topics quickly.

  • Property Law

    Statutory Provisions

    Statutory provisions are provided side by side with legal concepts to help you swiftly locate the relevant legislation.

  • Public Law

    Case Summaries

    We have summarised important cases for you so that you don't need to read long and boring cases.

  • Evidence

    Rules and Exceptions

    Rules and exceptions are clearly listed so that you know when a rule applies and when it doesn't.

  • Company Law


    Legal terms and key concepts are explained at the beginning of each chapter to help you learn efficiently.

  • Case Law

    Case law is provided side by side with legal concepts so that you know how legal principles and precedents were established.

  • Law Exam Guide

    Law Essay Guide

    You will learn essential law exam skills and essay writing techniques that are not taught in class.

  • Law Exam Guide

    Problem Question Guide

    We will show you how to answer problem questions step by step to achieve first-class results.

  • Conflict of Laws

    Structured Explanations

    Complex legal concepts are broken down into concise and digestible bullet point explanations.

  • Legal System and Method

    Legal Research

    You will learn legal research techniques with our study guide and become a proficient legal researcher.

  • Jurisprudence and Legal Theory


    All essential concepts, principles, and case law are included so that you can answer exam questions quickly.