Rights Of Donors Research Articles

Pretending There is No Union: Non-Derivative Quasi-Citizenship Rights of Third-Country Nationals in the EU

The enjoyment of some rights by third-country nationals in the EU is not dependent on the primary beneficiary of rights (be it a person or a company), thereby connecting the third-country nationals with the law of the Union directly, without any proxis. Moreover, in essence some of such rights are remarkably similar to the rights that EU citizens enjoy. Such directly enjoyable quasi-EU citizenship rights and their holders – many a category of third country nationals – constitute the key focus of this contribution, which aspires to walk through all the main statuses of third country nationals in the EU enjoying direct – as opposed to derivative – quasi-citizenship rights in the Union. Concluding such overview three significant interrelated problems with the way how third country nationals are treated in the EU are outlined:1. EU migration regulation assumes the denial of the legal political reality of the Union;2. EU migration regulation bars rationality from being taken into account when third country nationals’ rights are at stake;3. EU migration regulation sends a problematic signal that the goals and principles of the Union can be consistently ignored.We argue that such treatment of the legal-political reality of the European integration project is most unhelpful and has to be changed.

Especificación de un modelo de agenda sociopolítica en torno a los conflictos hídricos y la pacificación retributiva

La relación en torno a las políticas de abastecimiento y los conflictos entre autoridades y usuarios es materia de análisis del presente trabajo el cual discute la construcción de una agenda sociopolítica a partir de especificar un modelo; considerando los marcos teóricos y conceptuales, así como el estado del conocimiento. En este sentido, dirimir las problemáticas derivadas del tandeo y el incremento de tarifas supone no sólo la ausencia de agresiones entre los actores, sino la emergencia de una cultura de la paz y la neutralidad de acciones que inhiban la espiral de violencia. Se trata de un sistema de valores y normas que incidirían en las creencias de escasez o abundancia de agua para con ello determinar percepciones y emociones de riesgo e incertidumbre que incentiven la participación civil ya no como beneficiarios de derechos a los recursos y servicios hídricos, sino como responsables sociales de anticipar conflictos, aminorar desencuentros y coadyuvar a la equidad retributiva como símbolo de justicia.

A study on the civil enforcement of the trust beneficiary rights

A study on the civil enforcement of the trust beneficiary rights

Trust and Patrimony

The French jurist Pierre Lepaulle argued that the common law trust could be best understood, in civilian terms, as a patrimony by appropriation. This argument has been influential in some civilian receptions of the trust. In fact, Lepaulle misunderstood the nature of the common law trust, which is founded on the obligations owed by the trustee in relation to the trust property. The rights of beneficiaries in the common law trust are neither purely personal rights against the trustee, nor are they real rights in the trust property, but rather they are rights over the rights which the trustee holds as trust property; they have a proprietary character since they persist against many third party transferees of the trust property. This analysis of the common law trust leads to the conclusion that it would be a fundamental change to turn the common law trust into a legal person. More generally, it is argued that any legal system that characterizes the trust as a legal person will find that it has ceased to understand the trust as a fundamental legal institution.

Promotion and Protection of All Human Rights, Civil, Political, Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Including the Right to Development: Report of the Independent Expert on the Question of Human Rights and Extreme Poverty

Cash transfer programmes (CTPs) have been identified as effective tools for poverty eradication due to their capacity to reduce economic inequalities and break the intergenerational transmission of poverty. Yet these programmes have seldom been discussed or analysed from a human rights perspective. In this report, the United Nations independent expert on the question of human rights and extreme poverty recognizes that CTPs are a tool that can assist States in fulfilling their obligations under national, regional and international human rights law. The transfers may have an impact on the exercise of a number of economic, social, cultural, civil and political rights. In particular, CTPs have the potential to assist in the realization of the right to an adequate standard of living, including adequate food, clothing and housing. Nonetheless, CTPs are not necessarily the most appropriate and effective means of tackling extreme poverty and protecting human rights in all contexts. CTPs should be seen as only one component of social assistance policies. As such, they must be integrated within social protection systems and grounded by solid legal and institutional frameworks framed by human rights standards and principles. This report aims to promote further analysis of the impact of CTPs on the fulfillment of the human rights of beneficiaries.

Foundations in Jersey: the double century

This article considers the issues regarding the key participants in the Jersey foundation and the ongoing discussion including, among other issues, the rights of beneficiaries and the duties of council members since the introduction of Jersey foundations in 2009. This article argues that they serve a useful function and option for advisors dealing with the complex requirements of international individuals and their families and provides the author’s experience of working with foundations and how they are used.

The Law of the Sea Convention: No Place for Persons?

Abstract The article, adopting an innovative approach to the law of the sea, discusses the place and role reserved to persons in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC) and the legal regime of which it is a part. The LOSC and other law of the sea agreements are examined, focussing on provisions that mention persons, their rights and their duties. Shortcomings identified include: the difficulty to configure persons as the beneficiaries of rights and the recipient of duties and the ensuing uncertain subjectivity of persons under the law of the sea; the presence of numerous gaps and inconsistencies in the existing legal regulation; the unavailability of mechanisms to address violations of duties by states. The conclusions draw attention to the potential of the LOSC and other treaties to further develop the international legal regime applicable to persons at sea and to provide an adequate place for persons in the law of the sea.

The Individual and Structural Change in the International Legal System

The international law of today arguably bears little relation to the international law of the 19th century. At that time, international law was generally conceived as a body of rules and forms of conduct applicable to states in their relations with each other.1 During the 20th century, a more multifaceted and cosmopolitan view of legal relations in international law emerged. There is now little controversy surrounding the notion that international law is not exclusively concerned with inter–state relations, nor the proposition that individuals have a certain status in international law as the beneficiaries of rights and the bearers of obligations—indeed, that they are `subjects' of international law as the notion of `subjects' has been defined. There has thus been a significant shift in attitudes towards the individual and individual rights over the period since Vattel.2 Nevertheless, there are two aspects of the debate concerning individuals in the international legal system that remain controversial. The first is the question of the motivating force for this structural change in international law. Can it be explained on pragmatic grounds, or is it a product

Living Kidney Donor Advocacy Program

: In 2007, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services mandated that kidney transplant programs establish a living donor advocate program to ensure safe care and support for living organ donors. This quality improvement project assessed the impact of establishing a living donor advocate program and identified the ethical commitments and threats living kidney donors perceive throughout the donation process. : This quality improvement project reflects a mixed-methods methodology. Qualitative as well as quantitative data were generated through the donor-advocate consultation sessions and the written Living Donor Satisfaction Survey. Thirteen living donors participated. : No threats to donor rights were identified by either the donor or the advocate. Nonrelated donors were motivated by altruism, whereas related donors were motivated by a sense of family. A majority of donors reported being changed emotionally and spiritually by the act of serving as a living donor. The living kidney donors were overwhelmingly extremely satisfied with their decision to donate and perceived the living donor advocacy program as being very good. : Questions have been raised about what role the donor's spouse should have during the informed consent process. Further research is needed to better understand the role and power of an advocate when threats to the donor's rights are noted.

Recent decision of the Swiss Federal Administrative Court and its implications for the future of trusts in Switzerland

In its decision dated 18 March 2011, the Swiss Federal Administrative Court delivered a landmark ruling on characterization of rights of beneficiaries of a discretionary trust governed by a foreign law. The Court considered whether a bank account held in the name of trustees with UBS AG was within the ambit of a disclosure request received from the US Government investigating unpaid tax. Notwithstanding the fact that the plaintiff was within the class of objects/beneficiaries named in the trust instrument the court ruled that since the beneficiary/object had no control over the assets and income of the trust, he should not be treated as the beneficial owner of assets owned by the trust. In reaching its conclusion the Swiss Federal Administrative Court relied on the ratification in 2007 of the Hague Convention on the Law Applicable to Trusts and on Their Recognition and confirmed the wide recognition of the institution of trust in the Swiss legal order.

保険法における保険金受取人の権利

保険法では，生命保険契約の保険金受取人に関する規律が大きく見直されており，本稿では，保険金受取人の権利をめぐる問題について，その取得と放棄を中心に改めて検討した。保険金受取人は当然に保険契約の利益を享受する旨の規定が片面的強行規定とされ，保険事故発生まで保険金受取人を変更できることなどから，保険法では，保険契約者は保険事故発生前の保険金受取人の変更のみが認められ，保険事故発生後に保険金受取人がその権利を放棄した場合は，保険金請求権は消滅すると考えられる。

Borrower insolvency and Quistclose trusts; creditor claims following insolvency of settlor or corporate trustee; exploration of the limits of the elasticity of the private trust; beneficiary's rights to information; validity of non-charitable purpose trusts; and the jurisdictional reach of the US courts.

Dicta abound in the law reports to the effect that persons ‘engaged in business can be regarded as capable of looking after themselves’. But those dicta merely describe how things stand between parties looking out for their own interests. They are irrelevant to situations in which people, otherwise well capable of looking after themselves, engage commercially by placing trust and confidence in others. For example, the members of a law firm all might have PhDs, and years of hard-bitten commercial experience under their belts. Yet ‘a stronger case of fiduciary relationship cannot be conceived than that which exists between partners’. Another example is the Quistclose trust that arises where money is advanced for a particular purpose. In his Preface to Swadling, The Quistclose Trust: Critical Essays, Lord Millett described this as ‘the single most important application of equitable principles in commercial life’, and said that it is easily described from the commercial viewpoint as:

What the Medical Excuse Teaches Us About the Potential Living Donor as Patient

Since the inception of living donor kidney transplantation, physicians have expressed concern about the voluntariness of the donors and their ability to recuse themselves. The literature from the late 1960s and early 1970s reveals the practice of offering a false medical excuse, although more recent comments seem to focus more on a 'general statement of lack of suitability' or 'a blameless explanation'. Simmerling et al. argue that the provision of a medical excuse rests on deception, which is wrong on deontological grounds (that physicians should hold to a principle of veracity) and on consequential grounds (deception threatens to damage trust and the doctor-patient relationship and deception may have adverse impact on the donor's relationship with his family). In this paper I examine and reject these objections. I argue that a false medical excuse is morally unjustifiable, but the medical excuse understood as a 'general statement of lack of suitability' is morally permissible because it promotes donor autonomy (the donor's right to decide whether or not to donate), and protects and preserves the donor's rights to privacy and confidentiality (by affirming the donor as an independent patient).

Who Shall Benefit? Conflicts among the Landless Poor in a Philippine Agrarian Reform Programme

AbstractAcross plantation communities in the Philippines, farm workers are locked in struggles about their entitlement to land. Who may qualify as ‘rightful beneficiaries’ in the current government programme of land redistribution has become a deeply contentious issue. The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988 has produced — besides landowner resistance — an extensive renegotiation of land rights at the community level that may set landless workers against one another. This paper explores, for the sugarcane plantation region of Negros Occidental, why these intra-poor conflicts take place and how the boundaries between competing groups are drawn. Central to the analysis are: (1) a multi-actor perspective that considers the interactions of farm workers with state agencies, landowners, farm worker movements, NGOs, and different categories of the landless poor; and (2) a focus on the multiple social fields in which farm workers are involved (the fields of the state, market, social movements, landowner patronage, and the plantation community, among others), each with a defining social tie and legitimising discourse, each prompting a specific type of claim and justifying argument.

Enhancing the role of accountability in promoting the rights of beneficiaries of development NGOs

This paper identifies and assesses the extent to which downward accountability mechanisms in nongovernmental development organisations (NGDOs) have had the potential in practice to contribute to the effectiveness of rights‐based approaches to development. The paper draws on evidence gathered from a detailed documentary analysis and a series of in‐depth interviews undertaken with senior individuals working in the Irish NGDO sector. The analysis indicates variations in practice with regard to the substantive implementation of key downward accountability mechanisms. The accountability‐in‐practice revealed suggests that challenges to substantive implementation have arisen due to: insufficient Irish NGDO attention to oversight of downward accountability within locally based partner NGDOs; a reluctance and/or inability to transfer influence to locally based partner NGDOs by allowing them some influence on Irish NGDO governance and strategy; the perceived control of locally based partner NGDOs by local elites who may be distant from, and unrepresentative of, local communities; and a perception that locally based partner NGDOs may not require downward accountability. Drawing on these findings, the paper makes some suggestions aimed at helping to transform the rhetorical NGDO commitment to downward accountability into real practices that can contribute substantively to the realisation of the key elements of the rights‐based approach to development.

生命保険債権をめぐる利害調整

わが国の通説・判例は，保険契約者の債権者による解約返戻金請求権の差押えおよびその取立権に基づく生命保険契約の解約権の行使を認める。その前提には，生命保険契約と金融商品一般をほぼ同一に扱う，生命保険契約上の債権を通常の金銭債権とほとんど変わりないとする考えが存在する。最高裁判決に必ずしも同調しない下級審決定があらわれ，この議論が収束したわけではないことを確認し，いわゆる二分説による生命保険債権保護を再評価する。加えて，最高裁判決が示した権利濫用法理に実効性を持たせるための試論を提示する。

Tracing Trust Property: A Search for Justification and an Answer to the Change of Position Problem

This paper was prepared as an Honours Thesis at the ANU College of Law, under the supervision of Pauline Ridge. Contemporary opinion can be divided into two competing views about the nature of tracing. The suggests that the beneficiary's rights in the original property transfer into the new property when the substitution is made, so the new property represents the original property. On this view the original property right continues to exist, but now resides in the new property. A tracing based property claim asks the court to recognise the beneficiary's rights in the new property. Many contemporary restitution theorists disagree. They consider the notion that property rights persist through substitutions is a fiction. Their view - the - is that the beneficiary's rights against the volunteer are entirely new rights: rights in restitution that arise in response to the unjust enrichment of the volunteer. The property view gives the beneficiary/plaintiff a property right in the traceable proceeds of the original property. According to the restitutionary view, however, the plaintiff has a restitutionary claim, against which there is a change of position defence. The orthodox view does not admit the of change of position defence. This thesis asks whether a change of position defence should be available against a tracing based claim. This thesis looks behind tracing authority for a justification for the orthodox view of tracing trust property. Tracing is explained as the application of the beneficiary's right to adopt the proceeds of an unauthorised transaction of trust property. The structure of the trust, and the vulnerable nature of the beneficiary's interests, as created by the trust, requires that the beneficiary may adopt unauthorised transactions. Adoption, and tracing, therefore, is an attribute of the beneficiary's property rights under the trust. So, the defendant's change of position has no relevance to the plaintiff's property rights.

The information rights of beneficiaries of a Liechtenstein foundation -- an overview of recent court rulings

Journal Article The information rights of beneficiaries of a Liechtenstein foundation — an overview of recent court rulings Get access Markus Summer, LL.M. Markus Summer, LL.M. Marxer & Partner RechtsanwälteHeiligkreuz 6, 9490 Vaduz, Liechtenstein Tel: + 42 (3) 235 8181 Fax: + 42 (3) 235 8282 E-mail: markus.summer@marxerpartner.comwww.marxerpartner.com Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Trusts & Trustees, Volume 12, Issue 5, April 2006, Pages 37–40, https://doi.org/10.1093/tandt/12.5.37 Published: 01 April 2006

Corporations and constitutional guarantees

Certain constitutional guarantees are now clearly available to corporations, under the Canadian Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms, in the areas of Fundamental Freedoms and Legal Rights. Ambiguous terminology in the provisions dealing with Mobility and Equality Rights leaves the status of corporate applicants uncertain. The rationale of Big M may guarantee constitutional protection to corporations as indirect beneficiaries of rights to which they have no direct access. Whereas in the case of the Canadian Charter, responsability for the clarification of the scope and thereby of the political and social impact of the guarantees is likely to remain with the courts, an alternative solution may be available in Quebec. Clarification and/or reconsideration of the objectives of the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms, as they are defined through the identification of its beneficiaries, could take place in the context of general constitutional review.

Clarification obtained from the Privy Council as to the rights of beneficiaries to obtain disclosures from trustees

Journal Article Clarification obtained from the Privy Council as to the rights of beneficiaries to obtain disclosures from trustees Get access Robert I. Colquit Robert I. Colquit Advocates, Cains 15-19 Athol Street, Douglas, Isle of Man, IM1 1LB, Tel: +44 (0) 1624 638300, Fax: +44 (0) 1624 638333, E-mail: ric@cains.co.im, www.cains.co.im Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Trusts & Trustees, Volume 9, Issue 6, May 2003, Pages 4–7, https://doi.org/10.1093/tandt/9.6.4 Published: 01 May 2003