До этого говорилось вот о чем:

The general rule is that a parent is not responsible for the obligations of its subsidiaries, and therefore the exposure to any liability of those subsidiaries is limited to the value of the subsidiary itself.
The exceptions to this rule are rare and arise from a legal doctrine known as “piercing the corporate veil.” Piercing the veil occurs when a court disregards the independence of a subsidiary and imposes liability directly on its parent. This can arise if the parent fails to treat the subsidiary as a separate entity and fraud or unfairness would otherwise result (for example, because people dealing with the subsidiary were misled into thinking it was not a separate company).

unfairness и unfair conduct: это несправедливое (предвзятое) отношение или просто неправомерные действия?

fraudulent conduct - понятно...