单词 | Defence of illegality |
释义 | 以違法為理由的抗辯 A defence to a claim for compensation alleging that the plaintiff or applicant was involved in an illegal activity at the time that the cause of action occurred. Restitution - A defence to a claim of the enforcement of a contract or trust or for the restitution of unjust enrichment on the basis that the contract or trust was created or the enrichment conferred for an illegal purpose: Also known as ‘ex turpi causa non oritur actio’ (no action arises from an immoral cause). See also Clean hands; Ex turpi causa non oritur actio. Tort - One of the defences to an action in tort is the fact that the plaintiff was committing a criminal offence. This is usually expressed in the Latin maxim ex turpi causa non oritur actio: Tony Weir, A Casebook on Tort (6th Ed, 1988). What must be determined are the circumstances under which the plaintiff’s criminal conduct would defeat his claim, since the mere fact that the plaintiff’s behaviour is technically wrongful is not sufficient to avoid liability. There must be some causal connection between the offence and the plaintiff’s damage. Even if there is a causal connection, not all offences will give rise to the defence, and there is no obvious test for deciding which offences are sufficiently turpis. The defence of illegality cannot be relied upon as an answer to a claim for contribution under The Rules of the High Court Ordinance (Cap 4A): K v P (J, Third party) [1993] Ch 140, 1 All ER 521. No duty will be owed by one participant in an illegal enterprise to another joint participant where the circumstances are such that it is not possible to determine the particular standard of care which should be observed: Pitts v Hunt [1990] All ER 344, [1991] 1 QB 24 (CA). See also Ex turpi causa non oritur actio. 指就補償申索提出的抗辯,即指稱原告人或申請人在訴訟因由產生時,牽涉違法活動。 復還 - 就要求強制執行合約或信託或復還不公平的增進項目的申索,提出基於有關合約或信託或增進項目是為違法目的而訂立或授予的抗辯。另稱「不得以任何非法或不道義的因由興訟」。另見 Clean hands; Ex turpi causa non oritur actio。 侵權法 - 在這類侵權訴訟的抗辯下,指稱原告人事實上正犯有刑事罪行。通常以拉丁語的規則「不得以任何非法或不道義的因由興訟」表達:Tony Weir,A Casebook on Tort (1988年第6版)。由於原告人的行為技術上錯誤這僅僅的事實不足以免除被告人的法律責任,所以必須裁定的是,原告人在有關的情況下的刑事行為是否會推翻他/她的申索。而有關的罪行與原告人的損害之間必須有若干因果關係。但即使有因果關係,並非所有罪行均會產生此類抗辯;此外現時仍未有明顯的測試可藉以決定屬於充分非法或不道義的罪行。不可依賴以違法為理由的抗辯作為對根據《高等法院規則》(第4A章)提出的分擔申索的答辯:K v P (J, Third party) [1993] Ch 140, 1 All ER 521。如不可決定有關情況所須予以遵守的特定謹慎準則,則非法企業的參與者不會對另一位共同參與者負有任何責任:Pitts v Hunt [1990] All ER 344,[1991] 1 QB 24 (英國上訴法院)。另Ex turpi causa non oritur actio。 |
随便看 |
|
法律词典收录了8080条英汉双解法律词条,基本涵盖了常用法律英语单词及短语词组的翻译及用法,是法律学习的有利工具。