Fraud, Trusts and Trusting: Enforcing Crown Forfeitures in Equity, c. 1570–1620

IF 0.6 3区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY
David Foster
{"title":"Fraud, Trusts and Trusting: Enforcing Crown Forfeitures in Equity, <i>c.</i> 1570–1620","authors":"David Foster","doi":"10.1080/01440365.2023.2274686","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Conveyances with informal agreements to hold for the benefit of the transferor initially proved efficacious in avoiding statutory forfeiture provisions. In the late sixteenth century, the equity side of the Exchequer developed a capacious doctrine of revenue fraud designed to capture such informal arrangements and to subject the transferor to liability for crown forfeitures. Initially drawing inspiration from the ‘badges of fraud’ in the Statute of Fraudulent Conveyances 1571, the Exchequer quickly lowered the evidentiary threshold required to prove a conveyance fraudulent. A key badge of fraud was an ‘entrusting’ of the transferee by the transferor. The presence of a conveyance ‘in trust’ eventually became the sole evidence required to hold certain conveyances fraudulent under the statute. In the longer term, these cases became the precedential basis for holding the beneficiary’s right under a trust liable to forfeiture as a matter of doctrine.","PeriodicalId":43796,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Legal History","volume":"58 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Legal History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01440365.2023.2274686","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Conveyances with informal agreements to hold for the benefit of the transferor initially proved efficacious in avoiding statutory forfeiture provisions. In the late sixteenth century, the equity side of the Exchequer developed a capacious doctrine of revenue fraud designed to capture such informal arrangements and to subject the transferor to liability for crown forfeitures. Initially drawing inspiration from the ‘badges of fraud’ in the Statute of Fraudulent Conveyances 1571, the Exchequer quickly lowered the evidentiary threshold required to prove a conveyance fraudulent. A key badge of fraud was an ‘entrusting’ of the transferee by the transferor. The presence of a conveyance ‘in trust’ eventually became the sole evidence required to hold certain conveyances fraudulent under the statute. In the longer term, these cases became the precedential basis for holding the beneficiary’s right under a trust liable to forfeiture as a matter of doctrine.
欺诈、信托和信任:在衡平法中强制执行王室没收,约1570-1620
为了转让人的利益而签订非正式协议的交通工具最初证明在避免法定没收规定方面是有效的。在16世纪后期,财政部的公平方面发展了一套宽泛的税收欺诈理论,旨在捕捉这种非正式安排,并使转让者承担没收王冠的责任。最初,英国财政部从1571年《欺诈性转让法规》(Statute of欺诈性转让)中的“欺诈徽章”(badges of fraud)中汲取灵感,迅速降低了证明转让欺诈所需的证据门槛。欺诈的一个关键标志是转让人对受让人的“委托”。根据该法规,“信托”转让的存在最终成为认定某些转让具有欺诈性所需的唯一证据。从较长期来看,这些案件成为将信托下的受益人权利作为一种理论问题予以没收的先例依据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: The Journal of Legal History, founded in 1980, is the only British journal concerned solely with legal history. It publishes articles in English on the sources and development of the common law, both in the British Isles and overseas, on the history of the laws of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales, and on Roman Law and the European legal tradition. There is a section for shorter research notes, review-articles, and a wide-ranging section of reviews of recent literature.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信