国际私法委员会第四号报告书(遗嘱的正式效力)

Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review Pub Date : 2011-01-18 DOI:10.1111/J.1468-2230.1959.TB00514.X

J. H. Morris

{"title":"国际私法委员会第四号报告书(遗嘱的正式效力)","authors":"J. H. Morris","doi":"10.1111/J.1468-2230.1959.TB00514.X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"FOR nearly a century writers on the conflict of laws in England and elsewhere have been plagued by the incongruities and ambiguities of the Wills Act, 1861 (Lord Kingsdown's Act). The news that the Private International Law Committee in their Fourth Report1 propose its radical amendment is therefore to be welcomed.","PeriodicalId":426546,"journal":{"name":"Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fourth Report of the Private International Law Committee (Formal Validity of Wills)\",\"authors\":\"J. H. Morris\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/J.1468-2230.1959.TB00514.X\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"FOR nearly a century writers on the conflict of laws in England and elsewhere have been plagued by the incongruities and ambiguities of the Wills Act, 1861 (Lord Kingsdown's Act). The news that the Private International Law Committee in their Fourth Report1 propose its radical amendment is therefore to be welcomed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":426546,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-01-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1468-2230.1959.TB00514.X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1468-2230.1959.TB00514.X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

近一个世纪以来，英国和其他地方研究法律冲突的作家一直被1861年《遗嘱法案》(Kingsdown勋爵法案)的不协调和模棱两可所困扰。因此，国际私法委员会在其第四次报告中提出其根本修正案的消息是值得欢迎的。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Fourth Report of the Private International Law Committee (Formal Validity of Wills)

FOR nearly a century writers on the conflict of laws in England and elsewhere have been plagued by the incongruities and ambiguities of the Wills Act, 1861 (Lord Kingsdown's Act). The news that the Private International Law Committee in their Fourth Report1 propose its radical amendment is therefore to be welcomed.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Wiley-Blackwell: Modern Law Review

自引率

0.00%

发文量