- Published on
Legal Terms - confidential communication
A communication is not automatically inadmissible just because it is secret; this only applies where it falls under the purview of an evidentiary *privilege, such as legal professional privilege.
A communication is not automatically inadmissible just because it is secret; this only applies where it falls under the purview of an evidentiary *privilege, such as legal professional privilege.
- Published on
Legal Terms – confidentiality
n. (in medical law) a stringent and long-standing common law duty on the part of doctors to maintain the privacy of any patient information. When a doctor consults with a patient, they instantly take on this responsibility. AG v Guardian (No. 2) [1990] 1 AC 109, 260 states that it is not essential to prove that the patient's personal information was made public in order for confidentiality to be violated if it is viewed by an unauthorized party.
Breach of a patient's confidentiality may occasionally be acceptable, or even required, for example, in cases when the patient has an illness that requires reporting. It's interesting to note that the UK has not declared HIV to be a reportable illness in an effort to entice patients to seek testing and care. This implies that the patient has a legal obligation to disclose the virus to any prospective sexual partners, and the doctor is obligated by law to advise the patient on safe sex practices while maintaining patient confidentiality.
n. (in medical law) a stringent and long-standing common law duty on the part of doctors to maintain the privacy of any patient information. When a doctor consults with a patient, they instantly take on this responsibility. AG v Guardian (No. 2) [1990] 1 AC 109, 260 states that it is not essential to prove that the patient's personal information was made public in order for confidentiality to be violated if it is viewed by an unauthorized party.
Breach of a patient's confidentiality may occasionally be acceptable, or even required, for example, in cases when the patient has an illness that requires reporting. It's interesting to note that the UK has not declared HIV to be a reportable illness in an effort to entice patients to seek testing and care. This implies that the patient has a legal obligation to disclose the virus to any prospective sexual partners, and the doctor is obligated by law to advise the patient on safe sex practices while maintaining patient confidentiality.
- Published on
Legal Terms - confiscation order
An order that requires an offender convicted by the Crown Court of a *indictable offence, who has benefited by at least £10,000 from that offence (or an offence taken into consideration), to pay a sum that the court thinks fit (Proceeds of Crime Act 2002). Magistrates have the authority to issue these kinds of orders solely for a certain category of offenses (such as those involving the provision of video recordings of unclassified work). The order is extra to any other penalty and is enforced like a *fine. When legal action has been taken against an individual for a relevant offense, the High Court has the authority to issue a restraint order that forbids the transfer or sale of the individual's realizable property.
An order that requires an offender convicted by the Crown Court of a *indictable offence, who has benefited by at least £10,000 from that offence (or an offence taken into consideration), to pay a sum that the court thinks fit (Proceeds of Crime Act 2002). Magistrates have the authority to issue these kinds of orders solely for a certain category of offenses (such as those involving the provision of video recordings of unclassified work). The order is extra to any other penalty and is enforced like a *fine. When legal action has been taken against an individual for a relevant offense, the High Court has the authority to issue a restraint order that forbids the transfer or sale of the individual's realizable property.
- Published on
Legal Terms - confusion of goods
the blending of products belonging to two or more owners so that it is impossible to tell which were originally theirs. To the extent of their shares, the owners hold the goods in common. If one owner has the greatest claim to the mixture, he may be given possession of it, provided that he pays the other owner his share.
the blending of products belonging to two or more owners so that it is impossible to tell which were originally theirs. To the extent of their shares, the owners hold the goods in common. If one owner has the greatest claim to the mixture, he may be given possession of it, provided that he pays the other owner his share.
- Published on
Legal Terms - compensating the other
owner for his proportion.
rights of married couples Any married couple's rights, which include the ability to enjoy each other's consortium (company), cohabitation (sexual relations), and maintenance during the marriage. However, there is no longer a legal process in place to uphold these rights. After the previous procedure for the restoration of marital rights was eliminated in 1971, a husband insisted on having sex against his wife's will could be considered *rape.
owner for his proportion.
rights of married couples Any married couple's rights, which include the ability to enjoy each other's consortium (company), cohabitation (sexual relations), and maintenance during the marriage. However, there is no longer a legal process in place to uphold these rights. After the previous procedure for the restoration of marital rights was eliminated in 1971, a husband insisted on having sex against his wife's will could be considered *rape.
- Published on
Legal Terms – Conquest
The taking of territory from an opponent by armed force, followed by its official annexation following the end of hostilities. It excludes receiving land as a condition of a peace agreement ). Bellatio, or subjection, is the process of gaining territory after a conflict without a peace treaty since the defeated state has vanished. Since aggressive warfare is specifically forbidden by Article 2(4) of the UN Charter and Article 5(3) of General Assembly Resolution 3314 (XXIX) of 1975 essentially nullifies any legal title obtained in this manner, conquest is no longer recognized as a legal method of acquiring territory and granting valid title.
The taking of territory from an opponent by armed force, followed by its official annexation following the end of hostilities. It excludes receiving land as a condition of a peace agreement ). Bellatio, or subjection, is the process of gaining territory after a conflict without a peace treaty since the defeated state has vanished. Since aggressive warfare is specifically forbidden by Article 2(4) of the UN Charter and Article 5(3) of General Assembly Resolution 3314 (XXIX) of 1975 essentially nullifies any legal title obtained in this manner, conquest is no longer recognized as a legal method of acquiring territory and granting valid title.
- Published on
Legal Terms - Consanguinity, often known as a blood relationship
It is the term used to describe a relationship based on shared ancestry. Individuals who share two common ancestors are considered to be of full blood. They are of half blood if they have just one common ancestor.
It is the term used to describe a relationship based on shared ancestry. Individuals who share two common ancestors are considered to be of full blood. They are of half blood if they have just one common ancestor.
- Published on
Legal Terms - Conscience clause
A legal provision that permits someone to be excused from doing certain things that they ethically disagree with. For instance, there is typically a conscience clause exempting doctors from performing abortions in their employment contracts.
A legal provision that permits someone to be excused from doing certain things that they ethically disagree with. For instance, there is typically a conscience clause exempting doctors from performing abortions in their employment contracts.
- Published on
Legal Terms - agreement ad idem [Latin: consensus regarding the same issue] The parties to a contract must agree upon the same terms in order for the agreement to be enforceable
- Published on
Legal Terms - Consent
1. Consent is the voluntary agreement of a person who is capable and free to do so. In certain situations, consent is required. Contracts and marriages, for instance, are void unless both
parties assent to each other. The ability to grant consent must be there, it must be freely given, and it cannot be obtained by coercion or fraud. The law also acknowledges the implied permission that develops in ordinary circumstances, like acknowledging that you might be jostled in a busy store or on a packed train.
Consent concerns in criminal law are mostly related to offenses involving sexual activities and violence. The degree of injury (you could not, for example, consent to being killed) and the intent behind the action are factors that the courts will take into account when examining consent as a defense (R v. Donovan [1934] 2 KB 498; R v. Brown [1994] 1 AC 212; R v. Laskey, Jaggard and Brown App. No 109/95 (1997) 24 EHRR 39). The consent of a victim to conduct that is likely to cause him actual bodily harm (ABH), wounding (see R v Wilson [1997] QB 47), or homicide is not a defense for public policy reasons. In other cases, however, the defendant should be found not guilty if the jury or magistrates have a reasonable doubt as to whether the defendant thought the victim had consented, as well as whether the victim had consented.
Consent is presumed to be given in both conclusive and evidential ways under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (s. 74–75). It is unquestionably assumed that the victim did not consent to the relevant act in cases where the defendant purposefully misled the complainant about the nature or purpose of the relevant act (R v. Williams [1923] 1 KB 340) or purposefully pretended to be a person the complainant knew personally in order to get the complainant to consent to the relevant act (R v. Elbekkay [1995] Crim LR 163). It is assumed as an evidentiary matter that the victim did not consent to the relevant act where the victim was unlawfully detained, unconscious, unable to communicate, or involuntarily intoxicated, or where anyone used violence against the victim or caused her to fear that immediate violence would be used against her or another person (R v Olugboja [1981] 3 All ER 433).
In terms of defamation law, an individual who has given his or her approval for a statement to be published is not able to later sue for damages resulting from such publication. Likewise, a defamation lawsuit cannot be filed if the defendant received information from the claimant with his consent for it to be published. It should be mentioned that consent must be granted in a clear and unambiguous manner. On the other hand, behavior can infer consent
1. (Relating to medical law) Consent to get medical care or totake part in studies on medicine. For consent to be considered valid, it must meet four requirements: (1) the patient must receive enough information; (2) the patient must be competent, meaning he must be able to comprehend, retain, and evaluate the information in order to make a reasonable decision; (3) the patient must be in a position to make a decision on his own volition, meaning he must not be under duress from outside sources; and (4) the patient must communicate his choice. A legal defense against the charge of *battery (trespass against the person) is provided by real or legitimate consent. A physician must make sure the patient is aware of the treatment's goals, at least generally speaking, in order to prevent this kind of charge. If a doctor gives a patient incomplete information or ignores their inquiries, an action for *negligence may be filed.
The law only mandates that written agreement be provided in specific circumstances, such when a person is recruited for a clinical experiment. Three situations exempt from the requirement to acquire informed consent before beginning treatment are emergency, incompetence, and *therapeutic privilege.
1. Consent is the voluntary agreement of a person who is capable and free to do so. In certain situations, consent is required. Contracts and marriages, for instance, are void unless both
parties assent to each other. The ability to grant consent must be there, it must be freely given, and it cannot be obtained by coercion or fraud. The law also acknowledges the implied permission that develops in ordinary circumstances, like acknowledging that you might be jostled in a busy store or on a packed train.
Consent concerns in criminal law are mostly related to offenses involving sexual activities and violence. The degree of injury (you could not, for example, consent to being killed) and the intent behind the action are factors that the courts will take into account when examining consent as a defense (R v. Donovan [1934] 2 KB 498; R v. Brown [1994] 1 AC 212; R v. Laskey, Jaggard and Brown App. No 109/95 (1997) 24 EHRR 39). The consent of a victim to conduct that is likely to cause him actual bodily harm (ABH), wounding (see R v Wilson [1997] QB 47), or homicide is not a defense for public policy reasons. In other cases, however, the defendant should be found not guilty if the jury or magistrates have a reasonable doubt as to whether the defendant thought the victim had consented, as well as whether the victim had consented.
Consent is presumed to be given in both conclusive and evidential ways under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (s. 74–75). It is unquestionably assumed that the victim did not consent to the relevant act in cases where the defendant purposefully misled the complainant about the nature or purpose of the relevant act (R v. Williams [1923] 1 KB 340) or purposefully pretended to be a person the complainant knew personally in order to get the complainant to consent to the relevant act (R v. Elbekkay [1995] Crim LR 163). It is assumed as an evidentiary matter that the victim did not consent to the relevant act where the victim was unlawfully detained, unconscious, unable to communicate, or involuntarily intoxicated, or where anyone used violence against the victim or caused her to fear that immediate violence would be used against her or another person (R v Olugboja [1981] 3 All ER 433).
In terms of defamation law, an individual who has given his or her approval for a statement to be published is not able to later sue for damages resulting from such publication. Likewise, a defamation lawsuit cannot be filed if the defendant received information from the claimant with his consent for it to be published. It should be mentioned that consent must be granted in a clear and unambiguous manner. On the other hand, behavior can infer consent
1. (Relating to medical law) Consent to get medical care or totake part in studies on medicine. For consent to be considered valid, it must meet four requirements: (1) the patient must receive enough information; (2) the patient must be competent, meaning he must be able to comprehend, retain, and evaluate the information in order to make a reasonable decision; (3) the patient must be in a position to make a decision on his own volition, meaning he must not be under duress from outside sources; and (4) the patient must communicate his choice. A legal defense against the charge of *battery (trespass against the person) is provided by real or legitimate consent. A physician must make sure the patient is aware of the treatment's goals, at least generally speaking, in order to prevent this kind of charge. If a doctor gives a patient incomplete information or ignores their inquiries, an action for *negligence may be filed.
The law only mandates that written agreement be provided in specific circumstances, such when a person is recruited for a clinical experiment. Three situations exempt from the requirement to acquire informed consent before beginning treatment are emergency, incompetence, and *therapeutic privilege.
