Unincorporated Associations Research Articles

The Limited Liability of Unincorporated Associations

The Limited Liability of Unincorporated Associations

Mixed Economy Companies in Algerian Law No. 82-13 as Amended by Law No. 86-13 (Les societes d'economie mixte en droit algerien)

The Mixed Economy Company in Algerian Law means a company formed between a Socialist Enterprise and a foreign enterprise. The Socialist Enterprise is invariably a corporate entity. The foreign enterprise may be a corporate entity or an individual (Art. 1/1).1 The Socialist Enterprise must be a National Socialist Enterprise (Art. 33. Thus a Regional (de wilaya) or local (communale) Socialist Enterprise cannot participate in the formation of a Mixed Economy Company,2 nor can a private sector Algerian firm. The Mixed Economy Company is a joint stock company governed by the Commercial Coden subject to Law No. 82-13 as amended by Law No. 8g13 (the Law), relating to the Organisation and Operation of MLxed Economy Companies (Art. 1/2). The Law does not apply to unincorporated associations, as the Mlxed Economy Company is, by definition) a corporate entity (Art. 20).3 In this line, the Law states expressly that it is not applicable to the associations en participation formed under Ordinance No. 71-22 relating to foreign companies which operate in the field of exploration and exploitation of liquid hydrocarbons (Art. 2/2). Only the SociaIist Enterprises may fonn among themselves societes ert perticipation (Art. 796 C.C.) Moreover, the Law is not applicable to the Mixed Economy Companies whose registered offices are located outside Algeria (Art. 2/3). Usually such companies are governed by the laws of their registered offices. Furthermore) the Law does not apply to the Mixed Economy Companies formed by International Conventions (Art. 2/1). IJsually) the provisions of International Conventions prevail over the provisions of Municipal Laws. The Law, as a general rule) has no retrospective effect, and does not apply to the existing Algerian companies which are controlled by foreign partners (individuals of

The Status of British and American Trade Unions as Defendants in Industrial Dispute Litigation

IN the UK and USA over the last hundred years the view has been expressed that trade unions have outgrown their legal classification as unincorporated associations.' Both jurisdictions have had to wrestle with the central problem of whether a trade union is a legal entity which has the capacity to sue and be sued in its own name. 2 The major practical issue, which is inextricably linked to the legal issue, is whether the common fund of a trade union should be vulnerable to attack by a plaintiff in an action against either the union in its own name or in a representative action against the union. Statutory experiments giving unions the direct option of obtaining corporate status have proved to be unsuccessful on both sides of the Atlantic.' Nevertheless the status of trade unions as unincorporated associations has been materially affected by statutory intervention and a question, which still remains unanswered, is the extent to which statutory enactments have either directly or indirectly changed the overall status of a trade union to that of a quasicorporate entity. One of the central issues relating to industrial dispute regulation is whether or not court orders or damages awards should be enforced against trade unions in their own name. United Kingdom and federal US legislation has approached

Unincorporated Associations and Their Dissolution

The Bucks. Constabulary Widows' and Orphans' Fund Friendly Society was set up primarily to provide for the relief of the widows and orphans of deceased members of the Bucks. Constabulary. It was financed by voluntary contributions from the members. There was nothing in the rules about the destination of the society's property on its dissolution. In April 1968 the Thames Valley Constabulary came into being, an amalgamation of the Bucks. Constabulary and other forces. An effective instrument of dissolution of the society was signed on 14 October 1969; and Walton J. found himself facing in Re Bucks. Constabulary (No. 2) the question of “the destination of the assets of the friendly society …” Walton J. took the view that most past decisions “in relation to the destination of the funds of unincorporated associations” had “lost sight of” the “quite elementary … question of the property of unincorporated associations in the round.” He therefore proceeded to outline the general law on the holding of property by unincorporated associations as a necessary prelude to his decision on the destination of the funds. This was unquestionably the correct course to follow. It is suggested, however, that Walton J.'s view “in the round” on the holding of property by unincorporated associations is too simple, and that circumstances will arise in which a more complex problem on the destination of funds might arise, and which will surely call for a more complex answer. It must also be noted that Walton J. did not have to deal with the question of funds accruing to a society from outside sources, i.e., other than from the members themselves.

Federal Civil Procedure: Supreme Court Rules That Unincorporated Associations Are Subject to Suit Where "Doing Business"

Federal Civil Procedure: Supreme Court Rules That Unincorporated Associations Are Subject to Suit Where "Doing Business"

Diversity Jurisdiction for Unincorporated Associations

Diversity Jurisdiction for Unincorporated Associations

Citizenship of Unincorporated Associations for Diversity Purposes

Citizenship of Unincorporated Associations for Diversity Purposes

An Unresolved Problem: Federal Venue for Unincorporated Associations: Federal Venue. Unincorporated Associations. "Doing Business" as a Test

An Unresolved Problem: Federal Venue for Unincorporated Associations: Federal Venue. Unincorporated Associations. "Doing Business" as a Test

Trade Unions and Their Members

In commenting on a decision of the House of Lords, given some fifty years ago, concerning the law relating to unincorporated associations as it affected the Free Church of Scotland, Maitland was provoked to say, “I cannot think that it was a brilliant day in our legal annals when the affairs of the Free Church of Scotland were brought before the House of Lords and the dead hand fell with a resounding slap upon the living body.” It was with a much revitalised hand, however, that the same tribunal, in Bonsor v. Musicians' Union, disturbed the slumbers of that self-same branch of our law, but this time in its application to trade unions. On this occasion, the slap has been described as a blow struck for freedom, and though the ultimate decision is in itself of the first importance, it is perhaps in a consideration of the diverse means employed in reaching that result that the student will find the greatest interest.

Federal Venue for Unincorporated Associations: Problems and Suggestions

Federal Venue for Unincorporated Associations: Problems and Suggestions

Federal Venue for Unincorporated Associations: Problems and Suggestions

Federal Venue for Unincorporated Associations: Problems and Suggestions

Suits against Unincorporated Associations under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

Suits against Unincorporated Associations under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

Liability of Members and Officers of Nonprofit Unincorporated Associations for Contracts and Torts

Liability of Members and Officers of Nonprofit Unincorporated Associations for Contracts and Torts

Liability of Members and Officers of Nonprofit Unincorporated Associations for Contracts and Torts

Liability of Members and Officers of Nonprofit Unincorporated Associations for Contracts and Torts

Venue for Unincorporated Associations: Venue. Associations Subject to Suit at Residences of Members

Venue for Unincorporated Associations: Venue. Associations Subject to Suit at Residences of Members

Associations: Actions: Cross-Complaint, Counterclaims and Set-Off: Pleading: Right of Unincorporated Associations to Sue in Association Name

Associations: Actions: Cross-Complaint, Counterclaims and Set-Off: Pleading: Right of Unincorporated Associations to Sue in Association Name

THE DISCIPLINARY POWERS OF PROFESSIONAL BODIES

The Modern Law ReviewVolume 13, Issue 3 p. 281-306 Free Access THE DISCIPLINARY POWERS OF PROFESSIONAL BODIES Dennis Lloyd, Mr. Dennis Lloyd, m.a., ll.m.(Cantab), is Reader in English Law in the University of London. He is the author of The Law of Unincorporated Associations and joint author of Lloyd and Montgomerie on Rent Control.Search for more papers by this author Dennis Lloyd, Mr. Dennis Lloyd, m.a., ll.m.(Cantab), is Reader in English Law in the University of London. He is the author of The Law of Unincorporated Associations and joint author of Lloyd and Montgomerie on Rent Control.Search for more papers by this author First published: July 1950 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1950.tb00168.xCitations: 1 AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Citing Literature Volume13, Issue3July 1950Pages 281-306 RelatedInformation

Trusts for Unincorporated Associations. Legal Entity and Perpetuity

Trusts for Unincorporated Associations. Legal Entity and Perpetuity

Federal Jurisdiction. Venue. Application of Venue Provisions of Patent Act to Unincorporated Associations

Federal Jurisdiction. Venue. Application of Venue Provisions of Patent Act to Unincorporated Associations

The Law Relating to Unincorporated Associations: Being the Yorke Prize Essay for the Year 1937

The Law Relating to Unincorporated Associations: Being the Yorke Prize Essay for the Year 1937