- Published on
Legal Terms - fraudulent activity against the minority
An improper exercise of voting power by the majority of members of a company in which votes are not cast for the benefit of the company as a whole, as defined by common law. In general, the common law rules that were applicable in such cases have been superseded by sections 260–64 of the Companies Act 2006. Nevertheless, a common law derivative claim that is based on the concept of fraud on the minority continues to be applicable in cases where the Companies Act does not apply, such as in the case of a limited liability partnership (Harris v Microfusion LLP [2016] EWCA Civ 1212).
An improper exercise of voting power by the majority of members of a company in which votes are not cast for the benefit of the company as a whole, as defined by common law. In general, the common law rules that were applicable in such cases have been superseded by sections 260–64 of the Companies Act 2006. Nevertheless, a common law derivative claim that is based on the concept of fraud on the minority continues to be applicable in cases where the Companies Act does not apply, such as in the case of a limited liability partnership (Harris v Microfusion LLP [2016] EWCA Civ 1212).
- Published on
Legal Terms - forfeiture rule
A common law principle of public policy that, under specific conditions, prohibits an individual who has illegally killed another from obtaining a benefit resulting from the act of killing. The advantages to which the rule may pertain encompass prima facie rights under a will, intestacy regulations, and social security benefits. It also results in the severance of a joint tenancy. The rule likely encompasses all instances of unlawful death or complicity therein, including vehicular offenses and cases of manslaughter due to loss of control or decreased culpability (Amos v Mancini [2020] EWHC 1063 (Ch)). However, it will not be applicable in cases when an individual is deemed not guilty by reason of insanity. According to the Estates of Deceased Persons (Forfeiture Rule and Law of Succession) Act 2011, applicable to deaths occurring on or after 1 February 2012, the intestacy rules and/or any will are enforced as though the forfeiting individual predeceased the victim. The objective is to prevent the disinheritance of the innocent descendants or other beneficiaries of the forfeiting individual, although the specific implications in the context of wills have presented certain challenges (Macmillan Cancer Support v Hayes [2017] EWHC 3110 (Ch)). The Forfeiture Act 1982 grants extensive authority to a court to offer complete or partial relief from forfeiture, and the Court of Appeal delineated the appropriate interpretation of the Act in Dunbar v Plant [1998] Ch 412. A conviction is not required for the application of the rule or for relief from it; but, relief is unavailable if the applicant is "convicted" of murder.
A common law principle of public policy that, under specific conditions, prohibits an individual who has illegally killed another from obtaining a benefit resulting from the act of killing. The advantages to which the rule may pertain encompass prima facie rights under a will, intestacy regulations, and social security benefits. It also results in the severance of a joint tenancy. The rule likely encompasses all instances of unlawful death or complicity therein, including vehicular offenses and cases of manslaughter due to loss of control or decreased culpability (Amos v Mancini [2020] EWHC 1063 (Ch)). However, it will not be applicable in cases when an individual is deemed not guilty by reason of insanity. According to the Estates of Deceased Persons (Forfeiture Rule and Law of Succession) Act 2011, applicable to deaths occurring on or after 1 February 2012, the intestacy rules and/or any will are enforced as though the forfeiting individual predeceased the victim. The objective is to prevent the disinheritance of the innocent descendants or other beneficiaries of the forfeiting individual, although the specific implications in the context of wills have presented certain challenges (Macmillan Cancer Support v Hayes [2017] EWHC 3110 (Ch)). The Forfeiture Act 1982 grants extensive authority to a court to offer complete or partial relief from forfeiture, and the Court of Appeal delineated the appropriate interpretation of the Act in Dunbar v Plant [1998] Ch 412. A conviction is not required for the application of the rule or for relief from it; but, relief is unavailable if the applicant is "convicted" of murder.
- Published on
Legal Terms - Forgery
The crime of creating a "false instrument" with the intent for it to be regarded as authentic, therefore inflicting injury on others. According to the Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981, a “instrument” might refer to a document, a stamp issued by the Post Office or HM Revenue, or any device (such as magnetic tape) that records or stores information. An instrument is deemed "false" if it falsely claims to have been created or modified (1) by or under the authority of an individual who did not actually do such actions; (2) on a date or at a location that is inaccurate; or (3) by an individual who does not exist. Besides forging, it is a criminal offense under the Act to replicate or utilize a fraudulent instrument, with knowledge or belief of its falsity. Possessing or controlling specified counterfeit instruments with the purpose to present them as authentic is an offense. It is also an offense to create or possess any material intended for the production of the designated counterfeit instruments. The designated instruments encompass currency or postal orders, stamps, share certificates, passports, cheques, cheque cards, credit cards, and duplicates of entries in a registry of births, marriages, or deaths. All aforementioned offenses are subject to indictment punishable by a maximum of ten years' imprisonment and, upon summary trial, a fine at level 5 on the standard scale and/or six months' imprisonment. The Act addresses the offenses of counterfeiting currency, whether or not there is intent to circulate it as authentic; owning counterfeit currency; circulating counterfeit currency; creating or possessing tools for counterfeiting; and importing or exporting counterfeit currency. Reproducing any British currency note, such as photocopying a £5 note, becomes an offense, as does creating an imitation British coin under specific conditions. Certain of these offenses incur penalties equivalent to those for forgery.
The crime of creating a "false instrument" with the intent for it to be regarded as authentic, therefore inflicting injury on others. According to the Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981, a “instrument” might refer to a document, a stamp issued by the Post Office or HM Revenue, or any device (such as magnetic tape) that records or stores information. An instrument is deemed "false" if it falsely claims to have been created or modified (1) by or under the authority of an individual who did not actually do such actions; (2) on a date or at a location that is inaccurate; or (3) by an individual who does not exist. Besides forging, it is a criminal offense under the Act to replicate or utilize a fraudulent instrument, with knowledge or belief of its falsity. Possessing or controlling specified counterfeit instruments with the purpose to present them as authentic is an offense. It is also an offense to create or possess any material intended for the production of the designated counterfeit instruments. The designated instruments encompass currency or postal orders, stamps, share certificates, passports, cheques, cheque cards, credit cards, and duplicates of entries in a registry of births, marriages, or deaths. All aforementioned offenses are subject to indictment punishable by a maximum of ten years' imprisonment and, upon summary trial, a fine at level 5 on the standard scale and/or six months' imprisonment. The Act addresses the offenses of counterfeiting currency, whether or not there is intent to circulate it as authentic; owning counterfeit currency; circulating counterfeit currency; creating or possessing tools for counterfeiting; and importing or exporting counterfeit currency. Reproducing any British currency note, such as photocopying a £5 note, becomes an offense, as does creating an imitation British coin under specific conditions. Certain of these offenses incur penalties equivalent to those for forgery.
- Published on
Legal Terms - formal validity of a Will
In private international law, a rule that ascertains whether nation's laws regulate the requirements for the execution of a will where, for instance, the testator possessed a foreign residence or owned foreign assets. The Wills Act 1963, section 1, governs the position under English law. The rules of execution in England are applicable whether the will is executed in England or if the testator is domiciled in England.
In private international law, a rule that ascertains whether nation's laws regulate the requirements for the execution of a will where, for instance, the testator possessed a foreign residence or owned foreign assets. The Wills Act 1963, section 1, governs the position under English law. The rules of execution in England are applicable whether the will is executed in England or if the testator is domiciled in England.
- Published on
Legal Terms – forum
. [from Latin: a public space] The jurisdiction in which a matter is adjudicated. If a matter with a foreign element is presented before the English courts, the jurisdiction is England. Refer to the lex fori.
. [from Latin: a public space] The jurisdiction in which a matter is adjudicated. If a matter with a foreign element is presented before the English courts, the jurisdiction is England. Refer to the lex fori.
- Published on
Legal Terms - Forum non conveniens
[Latin: not in accord with the judicial forum] A principle allowing a court to refuse jurisdiction over a case, enabling it to be adjudicated in a different forum (e.g., a foreign court). Such determinations are predominantly at the court's discretion, provided that the party requesting a forum non conveniens ruling must submit to the jurisdiction of the alternative court. The court will grant the stay if it determines that a foreign court with competent jurisdiction is available and that the case can be adjudicated more appropriately for the interests of the parties and the pursuit of justice in that court. Courts typically evaluate criteria such as the location of witnesses, exhibits, and documents; the language of the witnesses and papers; the citizenship of the claimants; and the applicable law in the dispute. Typically, the onus of proof lies with the defendant to convince the court to exercise its discretion in favor of granting a stay; however, if the court determines that an alternative court is accessible, the burden then transfers to the claimant to demonstrate that exceptional circumstances necessitate the trial proceeding in the original court (Spiliada Maritime Corporation v Cansulex Ltd (The Spiliada) [1987] AC (HL) 460, 476 (Lord Goff)).
[Latin: not in accord with the judicial forum] A principle allowing a court to refuse jurisdiction over a case, enabling it to be adjudicated in a different forum (e.g., a foreign court). Such determinations are predominantly at the court's discretion, provided that the party requesting a forum non conveniens ruling must submit to the jurisdiction of the alternative court. The court will grant the stay if it determines that a foreign court with competent jurisdiction is available and that the case can be adjudicated more appropriately for the interests of the parties and the pursuit of justice in that court. Courts typically evaluate criteria such as the location of witnesses, exhibits, and documents; the language of the witnesses and papers; the citizenship of the claimants; and the applicable law in the dispute. Typically, the onus of proof lies with the defendant to convince the court to exercise its discretion in favor of granting a stay; however, if the court determines that an alternative court is accessible, the burden then transfers to the claimant to demonstrate that exceptional circumstances necessitate the trial proceeding in the original court (Spiliada Maritime Corporation v Cansulex Ltd (The Spiliada) [1987] AC (HL) 460, 476 (Lord Goff)).
- Published on
Legal Terms - forum prorogatum
Prorogated jurisdiction refers to the authority granted—through the agreement of the parties and subsequent to the commencement of proceedings—to the International Court of Justice, which would not have otherwise had the jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter. Consent may be expressed implicitly or informally, or through a series of actions (Anglo-Iranian Oil Case [1952] ICJ Rep 93).
Prorogated jurisdiction refers to the authority granted—through the agreement of the parties and subsequent to the commencement of proceedings—to the International Court of Justice, which would not have otherwise had the jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter. Consent may be expressed implicitly or informally, or through a series of actions (Anglo-Iranian Oil Case [1952] ICJ Rep 93).
- Published on
Legal Terms - forum rei
[Latin: forum of the matter] The court located in the country where the subject of the case resides.
[Latin: forum of the matter] The court located in the country where the subject of the case resides.
- Published on
Legal Terms – Forum Shopping
The strategy of selecting a jurisdiction for judicial proceedings based on the most advantageous legislation of that country. In certain cases, there exists a selection of jurisdiction.
The strategy of selecting a jurisdiction for judicial proceedings based on the most advantageous legislation of that country. In certain cases, there exists a selection of jurisdiction.
- Published on
Legal Terms – Foster Child
A kid who is under the care of an individual other than their biological or adoptive parents, or a person with parental responsibilities (see to foster parent). Local authorities are mandated by law to oversee the welfare of foster children in their jurisdiction and to examine and regulate the utilization of properties designated as foster homes. Foster children exclude those cared for by relatives or guardians, or placed in boarding arrangements by a local authority or voluntary group.
A kid who is under the care of an individual other than their biological or adoptive parents, or a person with parental responsibilities (see to foster parent). Local authorities are mandated by law to oversee the welfare of foster children in their jurisdiction and to examine and regulate the utilization of properties designated as foster homes. Foster children exclude those cared for by relatives or guardians, or placed in boarding arrangements by a local authority or voluntary group.
