真实意图和虚假意图在设立信托中的作用

M. Bryan
{"title":"真实意图和虚假意图在设立信托中的作用","authors":"M. Bryan","doi":"10.53300/001c.55616","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this paper is to illustrate Denis Ong’s facility for identifying the hard questions of trusts law with reference to his analysis, in Trusts Law in Australia, of a settlor’s intention to create a trust. As we will see, this is not a simple matter of ascertaining, from writing or other evidence, that an intention to create a trust has been manifested. A court may have to go further in some cases and consider whether the settlor possessed a genuine intention to create a trust, or whether the intention is, in some sense, counterfeit. This may be because the putative trust is a sham. Even if it is not a sham, there may be other reasons why the arrangement put in place by a settlor cannot be characterised as a trust. Recent decisions, considered later in this paper, have highlighted the distinction between true and counterfeit intention.","PeriodicalId":33279,"journal":{"name":"Bond Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Role of True and Counterfeit Intentions in Creating Trusts\",\"authors\":\"M. Bryan\",\"doi\":\"10.53300/001c.55616\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The aim of this paper is to illustrate Denis Ong’s facility for identifying the hard questions of trusts law with reference to his analysis, in Trusts Law in Australia, of a settlor’s intention to create a trust. As we will see, this is not a simple matter of ascertaining, from writing or other evidence, that an intention to create a trust has been manifested. A court may have to go further in some cases and consider whether the settlor possessed a genuine intention to create a trust, or whether the intention is, in some sense, counterfeit. This may be because the putative trust is a sham. Even if it is not a sham, there may be other reasons why the arrangement put in place by a settlor cannot be characterised as a trust. Recent decisions, considered later in this paper, have highlighted the distinction between true and counterfeit intention.\",\"PeriodicalId\":33279,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bond Law Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bond Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.55616\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bond Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.55616","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

本文的目的是通过参考Denis Ong在澳大利亚《信托法》中对委托人设立信托意图的分析,说明他在识别信托法难题方面的能力。正如我们将看到的,这不是一个简单的问题,即通过书面或其他证据来确定设立信托的意图已经表现出来。在某些情况下,法院可能需要更进一步,考虑委托人是否具有设立信托的真实意图,或者在某种意义上,该意图是否是伪造的。这可能是因为假定的信任是假的。即使这不是一个骗局,委托人制定的安排也可能有其他原因不能被定性为信托。本文稍后将讨论的最近的决定强调了真实意图和伪造意图之间的区别。
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
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Role of True and Counterfeit Intentions in Creating Trusts
The aim of this paper is to illustrate Denis Ong’s facility for identifying the hard questions of trusts law with reference to his analysis, in Trusts Law in Australia, of a settlor’s intention to create a trust. As we will see, this is not a simple matter of ascertaining, from writing or other evidence, that an intention to create a trust has been manifested. A court may have to go further in some cases and consider whether the settlor possessed a genuine intention to create a trust, or whether the intention is, in some sense, counterfeit. This may be because the putative trust is a sham. Even if it is not a sham, there may be other reasons why the arrangement put in place by a settlor cannot be characterised as a trust. Recent decisions, considered later in this paper, have highlighted the distinction between true and counterfeit intention.
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
0.00%
发文量
11
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
‘Often Fails to Give Close Attention to Detail’: Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in Criminal Justice Offender Populations A Practitioner’s Perspective Concerning the Links between Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and the Criminal Justice System Understanding the Nature of ADHD and the Vulnerability of Those with the Condition Who Fall Foul of the Criminal Justice System Corporate Purpose and the Misleading Shareholder vs Stakeholder Dichotomy Legal Considerations in Machine-Assisted Decision-Making: Planning and Building as a Case Study
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1