{"title":"可辩护的禀赋:比较英国和古罗马法的不同方法","authors":"S. Pratt","doi":"10.1093/TANDT/TTAB028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Whilst the parallels between ancient Roman fideicommissa and English trusts are well-documented, the author argues that insufficient attention has been given to their fundamental differences. This is particularly evident in the different methodologies employed by each system to protect endowments from potential attack by impatient beneficiaries. Accordingly, this article explores how English jurisprudence relied upon conditional terms—possibly informed by ancient Greek and Neoplatonic scholarship—to achieve defensibility and security for English trusts in ways that differ significantly from the Roman scheme. By doing so, this article raises important new questions about how English law has placed boundaries upon valid conditionality.","PeriodicalId":43396,"journal":{"name":"Trusts & Trustees","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Defensible endowments: comparing different approaches in English and ancient Roman law\",\"authors\":\"S. Pratt\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/TANDT/TTAB028\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Whilst the parallels between ancient Roman fideicommissa and English trusts are well-documented, the author argues that insufficient attention has been given to their fundamental differences. This is particularly evident in the different methodologies employed by each system to protect endowments from potential attack by impatient beneficiaries. Accordingly, this article explores how English jurisprudence relied upon conditional terms—possibly informed by ancient Greek and Neoplatonic scholarship—to achieve defensibility and security for English trusts in ways that differ significantly from the Roman scheme. By doing so, this article raises important new questions about how English law has placed boundaries upon valid conditionality.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43396,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Trusts & Trustees\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-14\",\"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/TTAB028\",\"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/TTAB028","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
Defensible endowments: comparing different approaches in English and ancient Roman law
Whilst the parallels between ancient Roman fideicommissa and English trusts are well-documented, the author argues that insufficient attention has been given to their fundamental differences. This is particularly evident in the different methodologies employed by each system to protect endowments from potential attack by impatient beneficiaries. Accordingly, this article explores how English jurisprudence relied upon conditional terms—possibly informed by ancient Greek and Neoplatonic scholarship—to achieve defensibility and security for English trusts in ways that differ significantly from the Roman scheme. By doing so, this article raises important new questions about how English law has placed boundaries upon valid conditionality.