- Published on
Legal Terms - executed trust (perfect trust)
A trust wherein the interests of all beneficiaries have been explicitly delineated by the settlor.
A trust wherein the interests of all beneficiaries have been explicitly delineated by the settlor.
- Published on
Legal Terms - Execution
1. The act of implementing a death sentence mandated by a judicial authority. Refer to capital penalty as well. 2. The execution of the rights of a judgment creditor. The word typically refers to the recovery of a debt solely, particularly through the seizure of the debtor's goods under a writ of *fieri facias or a warrant of execution. Refer to enforcement of decisio The fulfillment of the requisite procedures for a written document to attain legal validity. In the instance of a deed, this entails the execution and conveyance of the document.
1. The act of implementing a death sentence mandated by a judicial authority. Refer to capital penalty as well. 2. The execution of the rights of a judgment creditor. The word typically refers to the recovery of a debt solely, particularly through the seizure of the debtor's goods under a writ of *fieri facias or a warrant of execution. Refer to enforcement of decisio The fulfillment of the requisite procedures for a written document to attain legal validity. In the instance of a deed, this entails the execution and conveyance of the document.
- Published on
Legal Terms - execution of a will
The legal procedure of validating a testator's will. The Wills Act 1837, Section 9, mandates that the will be in writing and signed by the testator or by an individual in his presence and under his direction. The signature must be made or acknowledged (see acknowledgment) by the testator in the presence of at least two witnesses who must also sign the will or acknowledge their signatures in the testator's presence. A "signature" for these purposes does not necessarily have to be the individual's "usual" signature; it can be a simple mark that is intended to signify the individual's name (Hindmarsh v Charlton (1861) 8 HL Cas 160). A will that is witnessed by a beneficiary or the beneficiary's spouse/civil partner is not invalid; however, the gift to the beneficiary or spouse/civil partner is void (Wills Act 1837 s 15). A clause in a will that allows an executor to charge for their services is not considered a gift for the purposes of section 15, allowing the executor to act as a witness without forfeiting their charges (Trustee Act 2000 s 28).
The legal procedure of validating a testator's will. The Wills Act 1837, Section 9, mandates that the will be in writing and signed by the testator or by an individual in his presence and under his direction. The signature must be made or acknowledged (see acknowledgment) by the testator in the presence of at least two witnesses who must also sign the will or acknowledge their signatures in the testator's presence. A "signature" for these purposes does not necessarily have to be the individual's "usual" signature; it can be a simple mark that is intended to signify the individual's name (Hindmarsh v Charlton (1861) 8 HL Cas 160). A will that is witnessed by a beneficiary or the beneficiary's spouse/civil partner is not invalid; however, the gift to the beneficiary or spouse/civil partner is void (Wills Act 1837 s 15). A clause in a will that allows an executor to charge for their services is not considered a gift for the purposes of section 15, allowing the executor to act as a witness without forfeiting their charges (Trustee Act 2000 s 28).
- Published on
Legal Terms - executive agency
A semi-autonomous agency that is tasked with the delivery of a service in accordance with the policy and resource framework of a central government department. Executive agencies are not legally distinct from their "parent" government department and are governed by the powers that ministers have delegated. Consequently, they continue to be a component of the Civil Service. The principal executive of each agency is accountable to the minister of the relevant department. They are intended to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of public service delivery and do not participate in the formulation of policy. The objective is for central government to transition to a merely policy-making role, with service delivery being exclusively entrusted to specialized executive agencies. A few examples are the Royal Mint, Companies House, the Passport Agency, and the Prison Service.
A semi-autonomous agency that is tasked with the delivery of a service in accordance with the policy and resource framework of a central government department. Executive agencies are not legally distinct from their "parent" government department and are governed by the powers that ministers have delegated. Consequently, they continue to be a component of the Civil Service. The principal executive of each agency is accountable to the minister of the relevant department. They are intended to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of public service delivery and do not participate in the formulation of policy. The objective is for central government to transition to a merely policy-making role, with service delivery being exclusively entrusted to specialized executive agencies. A few examples are the Royal Mint, Companies House, the Passport Agency, and the Prison Service.
- Published on
Legal Terms -executor
A individual who is designated by a will to manage the estate of the testator. From the moment of the testator's death, the executors are authorized to manage the property of the deceased in accordance with the terms of the will. Nevertheless, they are typically required to obtain a grant of *probate from the court in order to substantiate the will and to verify their authority to deal with the estate. Although an executor may also be a beneficiary under the will, their appointment as an executor only grants them the authority to manage the deceased's property in accordance with his will, without granting them beneficial ownership. An executor who commences the administration of the deceased's assets subsequent to their demise is prohibited from subsequently relinquishing their position as executor (see renunciation). In contrast, an administrator.
A individual who is designated by a will to manage the estate of the testator. From the moment of the testator's death, the executors are authorized to manage the property of the deceased in accordance with the terms of the will. Nevertheless, they are typically required to obtain a grant of *probate from the court in order to substantiate the will and to verify their authority to deal with the estate. Although an executor may also be a beneficiary under the will, their appointment as an executor only grants them the authority to manage the deceased's property in accordance with his will, without granting them beneficial ownership. An executor who commences the administration of the deceased's assets subsequent to their demise is prohibited from subsequently relinquishing their position as executor (see renunciation). In contrast, an administrator.
- Published on
Legal Terms - executor de son tort
[English: through his own misconduct] An individual who engages in the management of the assets of a deceased individual without the consent of the appropriate personal representatives or the court. He is accountable to the estate's creditors and the legitimate personal representatives for any actions taken without their authority and for any estate assets that are transferred to him.
[English: through his own misconduct] An individual who engages in the management of the assets of a deceased individual without the consent of the appropriate personal representatives or the court. He is accountable to the estate's creditors and the legitimate personal representatives for any actions taken without their authority and for any estate assets that are transferred to him.
- Published on
Legal Terms -executor's Oath
In the past, a written statement was swore by executors or administrators of an estate to accompany an application for a *grant of representation. The requirement has been superseded by the requirement for a *statement of truth (Non-Contentious Probate Rules 1987, r 8, as amended)
In the past, a written statement was swore by executors or administrators of an estate to accompany an application for a *grant of representation. The requirement has been superseded by the requirement for a *statement of truth (Non-Contentious Probate Rules 1987, r 8, as amended)
- Published on
Legal Terms - exclusion and limitation of liability for negligence
The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 stipulates that an individual cannot exclude or limit their business obligation for death or injury caused by carelessness. He cannot exclude or limit his obligation for additional loss or damage resulting from carelessness unless whatever contractual term or notice he employs to do this meets the criteria of reasonableness as delineated in the Act. In this context, negligence refers to the violation of any contractual or common-law obligation to exercise reasonable care or skill, or the general duty of care mandated by the Occupiers' Liability Acts of 1957 and 1984. The Consumer Rights Act 2015 contains analogous provisions concerning consumer contracts. Businesses cannot limit or eliminate their liability for death or personal injury. All remaining exclusion clauses must be equitable. A phrase is deemed unfair if it contradicts the principle of good faith and creates a substantial disparity in the rights and obligations of the parties involved.
The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 stipulates that an individual cannot exclude or limit their business obligation for death or injury caused by carelessness. He cannot exclude or limit his obligation for additional loss or damage resulting from carelessness unless whatever contractual term or notice he employs to do this meets the criteria of reasonableness as delineated in the Act. In this context, negligence refers to the violation of any contractual or common-law obligation to exercise reasonable care or skill, or the general duty of care mandated by the Occupiers' Liability Acts of 1957 and 1984. The Consumer Rights Act 2015 contains analogous provisions concerning consumer contracts. Businesses cannot limit or eliminate their liability for death or personal injury. All remaining exclusion clauses must be equitable. A phrase is deemed unfair if it contradicts the principle of good faith and creates a substantial disparity in the rights and obligations of the parties involved.
- Published on
Legal Terms - Examination
The interrogation of a witness under oath or affirmation. In civil and criminal procedures, a witness summoned to provide testimony at trial may undergo *examination-in-chief, *cross-examination, and *re-examination.
The interrogation of a witness under oath or affirmation. In civil and criminal procedures, a witness summoned to provide testimony at trial may undergo *examination-in-chief, *cross-examination, and *re-examination.
- Published on
Legal Terms - Examination in Chief (direct examination)
The examination of a witness by the party that summoned him to provide testimony.Leading questions should generally be avoided, particularly for issues that are preliminary to the witness's testimony or are undisputed. The objective of examination-in-chief is to extract information advantageous to the case of the examining party. It is succeeded by a cross-examination conducted by the opposing party. In civil proceedings, Part 32 of the *Civil Procedure Rules stipulates that when a witness is summoned to testify at trial, their witness statement shall serve as their *evidence-in-chief unless the court directs otherwise. Furthermore, the witness may be cross-examined on their witness statement regardless of whether the statement or any portion thereof was referenced during their examination-in-chief.
The examination of a witness by the party that summoned him to provide testimony.Leading questions should generally be avoided, particularly for issues that are preliminary to the witness's testimony or are undisputed. The objective of examination-in-chief is to extract information advantageous to the case of the examining party. It is succeeded by a cross-examination conducted by the opposing party. In civil proceedings, Part 32 of the *Civil Procedure Rules stipulates that when a witness is summoned to testify at trial, their witness statement shall serve as their *evidence-in-chief unless the court directs otherwise. Furthermore, the witness may be cross-examined on their witness statement regardless of whether the statement or any portion thereof was referenced during their examination-in-chief.
