拉面纱?信托和行为能力诉讼中的隐私和匿名

IF 0.2 Q4 LAW
Georgia Bedworth, James Kirby
{"title":"拉面纱?信托和行为能力诉讼中的隐私和匿名","authors":"Georgia Bedworth, James Kirby","doi":"10.1093/tandt/ttad064","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The open justice principle enshrined 110 years ago as a fundamental right at common law by the House of Lords judgment in Scott v Scott [1913] AC 417 remains as central as ever to civil proceedings in England and Wales. However, its precise ambit and content continue to provoke discussion. Where the court is not adjudicating on rival claims in hostile litigation, but is instead administering the affairs of an individual who lacks capacity or a trust, or an estate, this causes particular difficulty. To what extent, if any, does the open justice principle apply to such proceedings? This article will examine how the courts—not only in England and Wales but also by way of comparison in offshore jurisdictions—have answered this question in recent years.","PeriodicalId":43396,"journal":{"name":"Trusts & Trustees","volume":"87 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Drawing a veil? Privacy and anonymity in trusts and capacity proceedings\",\"authors\":\"Georgia Bedworth, James Kirby\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/tandt/ttad064\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The open justice principle enshrined 110 years ago as a fundamental right at common law by the House of Lords judgment in Scott v Scott [1913] AC 417 remains as central as ever to civil proceedings in England and Wales. However, its precise ambit and content continue to provoke discussion. Where the court is not adjudicating on rival claims in hostile litigation, but is instead administering the affairs of an individual who lacks capacity or a trust, or an estate, this causes particular difficulty. To what extent, if any, does the open justice principle apply to such proceedings? This article will examine how the courts—not only in England and Wales but also by way of comparison in offshore jurisdictions—have answered this question in recent years.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43396,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Trusts & Trustees\",\"volume\":\"87 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Trusts & Trustees\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/tandt/ttad064\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trusts & Trustees","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/tandt/ttad064","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

110年前,英国上议院在斯科特诉斯科特案(Scott v Scott [1913] AC 417)一案的判决中,将公开司法原则作为一项基本权利载入普通法,如今这一原则仍然是英格兰和威尔士民事诉讼的核心。然而,其确切的范围和内容继续引发讨论。如果法院不是对敌对诉讼中的竞争性索赔作出裁决,而是管理一个缺乏行为能力或信托或遗产的个人的事务,这就会造成特别的困难。公开司法原则在多大程度上(如有的话)适用于此类诉讼?本文将考察近年来法院(不仅是英格兰和威尔士的法院,还包括离岸司法管辖区的法院)是如何回答这个问题的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Drawing a veil? Privacy and anonymity in trusts and capacity proceedings
Abstract The open justice principle enshrined 110 years ago as a fundamental right at common law by the House of Lords judgment in Scott v Scott [1913] AC 417 remains as central as ever to civil proceedings in England and Wales. However, its precise ambit and content continue to provoke discussion. Where the court is not adjudicating on rival claims in hostile litigation, but is instead administering the affairs of an individual who lacks capacity or a trust, or an estate, this causes particular difficulty. To what extent, if any, does the open justice principle apply to such proceedings? This article will examine how the courts—not only in England and Wales but also by way of comparison in offshore jurisdictions—have answered this question in recent years.
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
自引率
66.70%
发文量
92
×
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