受托人的权利和权力:分类分析

Chris T S Chiam
{"title":"受托人的权利和权力:分类分析","authors":"Chris T S Chiam","doi":"10.53300/001C.11637","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article examines what differences there are, if any, between the rights and powers of a trustee. Although these terms are commonly applied to distinguish between various aspects of trusteeship, there is no clear explanation of the basis of this taxonomy. This article argues that there is no conceptual difference between these two terms, and that they should merely be seen as labels of convenience and convention. As a result, the law should be understood as giving trustees a range of abilities, with there being no principled difference between what are commonly called rights and powers. This conclusion not only answers an unresolved taxonomical issue, but may also have implications for statutory interpretation and the constraints that trustees have when they exercise functions vested in them.","PeriodicalId":33279,"journal":{"name":"Bond Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Trustee Rights and Powers: A Taxonomical Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Chris T S Chiam\",\"doi\":\"10.53300/001C.11637\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article examines what differences there are, if any, between the rights and powers of a trustee. Although these terms are commonly applied to distinguish between various aspects of trusteeship, there is no clear explanation of the basis of this taxonomy. This article argues that there is no conceptual difference between these two terms, and that they should merely be seen as labels of convenience and convention. As a result, the law should be understood as giving trustees a range of abilities, with there being no principled difference between what are commonly called rights and powers. This conclusion not only answers an unresolved taxonomical issue, but may also have implications for statutory interpretation and the constraints that trustees have when they exercise functions vested in them.\",\"PeriodicalId\":33279,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bond Law Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-08\",\"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.11637\",\"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.11637","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

本文探讨了受托人的权利和权力之间的差异(如果有的话)。尽管这些术语通常用于区分托管的各个方面,但对这种分类法的基础没有明确的解释。本文认为,这两个术语在概念上没有区别,它们只应被视为方便和惯例的标签。因此,法律应该被理解为赋予受托人一系列能力,通常所说的权利和权力之间没有原则上的区别。这一结论不仅回答了一个尚未解决的分类学问题,而且可能对法定解释和受托人行使赋予他们的职能时所受的约束产生影响。
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
Trustee Rights and Powers: A Taxonomical Analysis
This article examines what differences there are, if any, between the rights and powers of a trustee. Although these terms are commonly applied to distinguish between various aspects of trusteeship, there is no clear explanation of the basis of this taxonomy. This article argues that there is no conceptual difference between these two terms, and that they should merely be seen as labels of convenience and convention. As a result, the law should be understood as giving trustees a range of abilities, with there being no principled difference between what are commonly called rights and powers. This conclusion not only answers an unresolved taxonomical issue, but may also have implications for statutory interpretation and the constraints that trustees have when they exercise functions vested in them.
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