Talk:Ultra vires
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it. |
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the assessment scale. |
| Mid | This article has been assessed as Mid-importance on the assessment scale. |
haram j.....
[edit] ultra vires
jubok...xkan xda orang nak wat article ultra vires ni?shiall la....pegi mampus la wei...haha from setan
[edit] Executory, or Executed?
From the article as it stands as of 20061208: "# If the contract was fully executory, the defense of ultra vires might be raised by either party."
Should that instead read "executed?" The next sentence ("# If the contract was partially performed, and the performance was held to be insufficient to bring the doctrine of estoppel into play, a suit for quasi contract for recovery of benefits conferred was available."), if it is meant to be parallel to that one, makes me think that "executed" is the right word, but since this isn't something I've seen covered in class yet, I am reluctant to change if there's a better explanation. So ... is there? :)
Cheers,
timbo 15:29, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- I think the edit is correct as is. "Executory" means 'has yet to be performed'. In which case, either party can "block" any claims based on the contract by pleading ultra vires. But if one side has partly performed (or fully performed) you give rise to estoppel arguments. Legis (talk - contributions) 16:14, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Modern Times Ultra Vires in Canada
In the Constitutional Law section, it states that ultra vires is "Almost unheard of in modern times". In Canada, certain parts of Manitoba's and Quebec's language laws were found to be ultra vires by the Supreme Court of Canada in 1978. Could someone more qualified than I please make reference to this in the article? CWPappas (talk) 05:11, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
