| 单词 | Ultra vires |
| 释义 | 越權的 Lat - beyond the power. An ultra vires act is beyond the legal power or authority of a person, institution or of legislation, and therefore invalid. The opposite of ultra vires is intra vires. Administrative law - An executive or administrative decision made ultra vires in the narrow sense is one not authorised by the enactment under which it was purported to be made; in the broad sense it is one made in abuse of the power conferred by the enactment. Public bodies cannot enter into contracts which are beyond their powers: Cudgen Rutile (No 2) Pty Ltd v Chalk [1975] AC 520, 2 WLR 1 (PC). A finding that the act is ultra vires renders it incapable of ever having had any legal effect: Hoffman-La Roche & Co AG v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry [1975] AC 295, [1974] 2 All ER 1128 (HL). The invalidity of an ultra vires act cannot generally be cured by waiver or acquiescence: Essex County Council v Essex Incorporated Congregational Church Union [1963] AC 808, 1 All ER 326 (HL). See also Abuse of power; Judicial review. Constitutional law - A term used to describe legislative, executive or judicial acts that are not authorised by the constitution, or in the case of regulation, by the law that authorised the making of such regulation. See also Unconstitutional. Company - The action of a corporation with limited capacity acting through natural persons, which purports to do something beyond its capacity, (which is usually set out in its memorandum and articles of association). An act beyond the objects of a company is ultra vires and is void. It could be validated by the assent of a general meeting of the members or of every individual member (Towers v African Tug Co [1904] 1 Ch 558 (CA)), or by taking judgment against the company by consent (Re Jon Beauforte (London) Ltd [1953] Ch 131, 1 All ER 634), or by estoppel (South London Greyhound Racecourses Ltd v Wake [1931] 1 Ch 496). Examples of ultra vires acts are selling the whole undertaking when the company was heavily indebted (The Liquidators of The Golden City Theatre Ltd v Chan Chung Shing [1954] HKLR 19), and disposing freely of money so as to be permanently deprived of its money (Stable Investment Ltd (in liquidation) v Chang Shin-chuen [1982] HKLR 79). However, the Companies Ordinance now provides that an act of a company, including a transfer of property to or by the company, is not invalid by reason only that it exceeds the company’s capacity as set out in its memorandum or is in contravention of a prohibition in the memorandum or articles: Companies Ordinance (Cap 32) s 5B(3). A member may, however, bring proceedings to restrain the doing of an act in contravention of the company’s memorandum or articles: s 5B(2). See also Authority; Corporate capacity; Intra vires; Memorandum of association. Restitution - A term used to describe an unlawful claim by a public authority for the payment of money from a person subject to that authority, such as a demand for taxes under an invalid regulation. A person who submits to an ultra vires demand may be entitled to restitution on the basis that the public authority is unjustly enriched by the payment: Woolwich Equitable Building Society v IRC [1993] AC 70; Ng Kuen Wai (t/a Willie Textiles) v Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu (a firm), Commissioner of Inland Revenue (HCA 7266/98, unreported). See also Submission to an honest claim. 拉丁語 － 權力範圍以外。越權的行為超逾某個人、機構或法例的法定權力或權限，因此而無效。「越權」的相對於「在權限以內」。 行政法 - 在越權的情況下作出的行政決定，狹義而言指並非按成文法規的描述而授權的決定；廣義而言指在濫用藉成文法則授予的權力的情況下作出的決定。公共機構不可訂立超逾其權力的合約：Cudgen Rutile (No 2) Pty Ltd v Chalk [1975] AC 520, 2 WLR 1（英國樞密院）。某行為被裁斷為越權令致該行為不可曾經有任何法律效力：Hoffman-La Roche & Co AG v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry [1975] AC 295, [1974] 2 All ER 1128（英國上議院）。越權行為的無效性一般不可藉放棄權利或默許而予以糾正：Essex County Council v Essex Incorporated Congregational Church [1963] AC 808, 1 All ER 326（英國上議院）。另見 Abuse of power; Judicial review。 憲法 - 用以描述以下行為的用語：並非獲憲法授權的立法、行政或司法行為；或就規則而言，獲法律授權的規則，而該法律批准該等規則的制定。另見 Unconstitutional。 公司 - 透過自然人行事及權力有限的法團的以下行為：該法團看來作出某些超逾其權力（通常在其組織章程大綱及章程細則中列明）的事情。超逾公司宗旨的行為屬越權，並屬無效。該越權行為可藉以下方法變成有效：全體大會的成員或每一名個別成員的批准（Towers v African Tug Co [1904] 1 Ch 558（芵國上訴法院））、或同意接受判該公司敗訴的判決（Re Jon Beauforte (London) Ltd [1953] Ch 131, 1 All ER 634）、或不容反悔（South London Greyhound Racecourses Ltd v Wake [1931] 1 Ch 496）。越權行為的例子有：在公司欠下巨額債務時售賣全部業務（The Liquidators of The Golden City Theatre Ltd v Chan Chung Shing [1954] HKLR 19）、及自由地處置該公司款項而永久地剝奪該筆款項（Stable Investments Ltd (in liquidation) v Chang Shin-chuen [1982] HKLR 79）。但《公司條例》現行規定，任何公司的任何作為（包括向該公司或由該公司作出的財產轉讓），並不會僅因該公司超逾在其組織章程大綱列明的權力或違反組織章程大綱或章程細則禁止的情況的權力而無效：《公司條例》（第32章）第5B(3)條。但任何公司的任何成員均可提起法律程序以制止作出任何違反公司的組織章程大綱或章程細則的作為：第5B(2)條。另見 Authority; Corporate capacity; Intra vires; Memorandum of association。 復還 - 用以描述非法申索的用語，該申索是由某公共主管當局針對受該主管當局管轄的人就支付款項而提出，例如根據無效的規則而索求稅款。接受某越權索求的人，可基於該公共主管當局藉該筆款項不正當地獲得收益，而享有復還的權利：Woolwich Equitable Building Society v IRC [1993] AC 70; Ng Kuen Wai (t/a Willie Textiles) v Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu (a firm), Commissioner of Inland Revenue（高院民事訴訟1998年第7266號，未經彙報）。另見 Submission to an honest claim。 |
| 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。