bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
Introduction
Authors: Ashdown Michael 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
In 1958 the trustees of a settlement, established in 1947 by Sir William Bass for the benefit of Captain Hastings-Bass and his issue, exercised the statutory power of advancement to transfer £50 000 from that settlement to the trustees of another trust fund created in 1957 for the benefit of Captain Hastings-Bass’s son, William, and William’s issue. What the trustees could not then foresee was that the later decision of the House of Lords in Re Pilkington’s Will Trusts would render some of the 1957 trusts perpetuitous and void. The Commissioners of Inland Revenue argued that this oversight rendered the purported exercise of the power of advancement void, and that in consequence they were entitled to claim estate duty on the £50 000 when Captain Hastings-Bass died in 1964. In 1974 the Court of Appeal rejected this argument, holding that the 1957 trusts created a life interest vested in William Hastings-Bass, and that this life interest survived even though the remoter interests were void for perpetuity.
Applying the Re Hastings-Bass Rule
Authors: Ashdown Michael 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
The Supreme Court’s decision in Pitt v Holt has brought welcome clarity to the Re Hastings-Bass rule, by endorsing the Court of Appeal’s reformulation of the rule as based on flawed decision making by trustees and other fiduciaries. The court’s power to intervene is now explicitly dependent on trustees breaching their duty to give reasonable and responsible consideration to the exercise of their powers and discretions. Such a breach will often also be coupled with a breach of the duty of care owed by trustees to beneficiaries.
The Netherlands
Authors: van Galen Robert 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
The material contained herein is intended as a general guide only and is not intended to be a memorandum of law study, nor to provide legal advice, and should not be treated as a substitute for legal advice concerning particular situations. Legal advice should always be sought before taking any action based on the information provided. The publishers, editors, and author bear no responsibility for any errors or omissions contained therein.
Spain
Authors: Bou Agustín 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
The material contained herein is intended as a general guide only and is not intended to be a memorandum of law study, nor to provide legal advice, and should not be treated as a substitute for legal advice concerning particular situations. Legal advice should always be sought before taking any action based on the information provided. The publishers, editors, and author bear no responsibility for any errors or omissions contained therein.
Proprietary Rights and Insolvency
Authors: Calnan Richard 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
This book explains how a creditor of an insolvent debtor can take priority over other creditors by claiming a proprietary interest in assets held by the debtor, and concentrates on the circumstances in which proprietary interests are created by operation of law or are implied from the arrangements between the parties. This is a subject of particular importance and difficulty in common law systems because of the changeable nature of equitable proprietary interests, and this book provides a clear and structured explanation of the current state of the law, with detailed reference to case law from England and Wales as well as Commonwealth jurisprudence, and suggests how it might be clarified and simplified by returning to first principles. The new edition considers a number of important developments which pertain to proprietary rights and insolvency. It evaluates the key decision of the Supreme Court in FHR European Ventures v Cedar Capital Partners. Although this has settled the question of whether constructive trusts extend to bribes, it has raised more general issues regarding the approach of the courts to the imposition of proprietary remedies, which the book explores. It also covers recent Privy Council and Court of Appeal decisions concerning constructive notice (Credit Agricole v Papadimitrou, Central Bank of Ecuador v Conticorp, and SFO v Lexi), as well as interesting issues concerning the new status of intangibles (Armstrong v Winnington) and the status of the anti-deprivation rule (Belmont Park v BNY). Proprietary Rights and Insolvency is a lucid and practical reference source on insolvency and property law.
Tracing in Equity
Authors: Calnan Richard 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
This chapter discusses the requirements of tracing in equity, including the principles by which one person can trace its asset into a substitute. Possible exceptions to the principles are also discussed. It contains a detailed discussion of the cases. The chapter contains a detailed discussion of the cases. It also considers the principles for the identification of a substitute asset, including where there has been mixture with other assets. The recurring problem of the link between equitable tracing and fiduciary relationships is discussed.
The Rationale of the Transaction Avoidance Provisions of the Insolvency Act 1986
Authors: Parry Rebecca 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
It is important to examine the rationale of the transaction avoidance provisions of the Insolvency Act 1986, as this will assist in interpreting such laws and will also enable an assessment of whether these laws are structured in an optimal manner. Often, legislative travaux préparatoires are useful in ascertaining legislative intent. However, the rationale of the transaction avoidance provisions of England and Wales is not something that can be easily detected from the government reviews of insolvency law that influenced the format of the Insolvency Act 1986. The tone of such reviews is largely pragmatic as far as transaction avoidance is concerned: the focus of the reviewers appears to have been on areas that were causing problems in practice at the time. This may have been because of a need to focus on bigger issues such as corporate rescue and the accountability of company directors. It may be that the reviewers did consider the rationale of the transaction avoidance provisions, and the manner in which they complement the objectives of insolvency law, but excluded such issues from the reports for economy of space in what was a thorough and wide-ranging report.
Avoidance of General Assignments of Book Debts—Bankruptcy (Insolvency Act 1986, Section 344)
Authors: Parry Rebecca 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
In cases where the bankrupt has engaged in business, it may be that the bankrupt has executed a general assignment of book debts, or a class of such debts, in order to raise capital. Under section 344, such an assignment is void against the trustee, in respect of debts that were unpaid at the time when the bankruptcy petition was presented, unless the assignment has been registered under the Bills of Sale Act 1878. It is only the assignment that is void and not the whole instrument containing it, so that the debt owed by the bankrupt, other covenants, and other assignments remain valid. The provision does not require that the debtor was insolvent at the time of the assignment. One reason why these assignments are void unless registered is that it can be difficult to judge whether a proper price has been paid in respect of a general assignment. Also, the presence of substantial book debts may deceive creditors into thinking that the debtor is creditworthy: registration enables the prudent creditor to discover the true position. The restrictions, however, only apply in bankruptcy and it may be that, in the modern context, this restriction puts unincorporated businesses at an unwarranted disadvantage.
Pensions (Bankruptcy Only)
Authors: Ayliffe James 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
A category of asset that requires separate consideration is the debtor’s pension. A need for transaction avoidance may arise here if the bankrupt has made excessive contributions to his pension in a bid to deprive creditors of these sums. Although formerly a problem, due to the inadequacy of existing avoidance provisions, case law developments meant that such tactics by the bankrupt were to no avail. This area of law is now primarily governed by the Welfare Reform and Pensions Act 1999, the material parts of which came into force on various dates, the earliest being 29 May 2000. Provisions of this Act dictate that the debtor’s entitlements under approved pension arrangements do not form part of the debtor’s estate in bankruptcy. Rights under pension schemes that are not approved are also exempted by regulation. In each of these cases the trustee is, however, able to apply for an order to set aside any excessive pension funding. Relevant case law principles will still govern the affairs of those who were adjudged bankrupt prior to 29 May 2000, and so they are considered in this chapter also. A diagram explaining the various applicable rules appears at the end of the chapter.
Function and Objectives of Insolvency Law
Authors: Anderson Hamish 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
Why have insolvency law? The simple answer to that question is that credit is indispensable in a modern free market economy but credit brings with it the possibility of default. The extension of credit in whatever form, and whether in large or small amounts, creates a need for the law to provide remedies to deal with that default when it occurs. The ordinary remedies are private remedies; the creditor obtains and enforces a judgment for its private benefit but sometimes the debtor cannot pay because its liabilities are greater than its means. Insolvency law then provides the method by which the remaining assets are administered in accordance with a predetermined scheme, replacing private competition between creditors with an orderly distribution to all in so far as there are assets to support it.
Conflicts and Profits
Authors: Rosemary Langford 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
This chapter provides comprehensive analysis of the duties to avoid conflicts and profits (the conflicts and profits rules) and their statutory equivalents. The parameters of the term ‘conflicts’ are explored, including conflicts of interest and conflicts of duty. Debate surrounds whether ‘real sensible possibility’ of conflict is sufficient to give rise to a breach of the conflicts rule or whether proof of ‘actual’ 76 conflict or ‘pursuit’ of a conflict is necessary. The duty to avoid unauthorized profits is also discussed given that, in many cases, this duty also pertains to conflicts. The interrelationship between the duties to avoid conflicts and profits is critically analysed and comprehensive commentary on statutory iterations is provided. It is suggested that the key requirement, which also operates as a ‘rule of thumb’ and underlying principle, is that directors act in good faith in what they consider to be the interests of the company, thus exercising independent judgment. In this sense, the requirements imposed by corporate governance regimes essentially protect the ability of, and require, directors to act in good faith in the interests of the company. The final part of the chapter outlines the law concerning directors’ fiduciary duties to individual shareholders.
Multiple Directorships (Including Competing Directorships)
Authors: Rosemary Langford 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
The duty to avoid conflicting duties presents key challenges for individuals who hold multiple directorships. The issue of multiple directorships is fraught with uncertainty due to the fact that such directorships are not prohibited but can nevertheless give rise to complex conflicts issues. This is particularly the case concerning competing directorships, which have generated significant judicial attention. The conflicts involved in these positions are manifold—directors who serve on multiple boards face issues concerning protection of confidential information, serving the interests of each of the companies, and devoting adequate time to each company. These issues are exacerbated in the case of competing and interlocking directorships.
Related Party Regimes and Other Specific Statutory Regimes
Authors: Rosemary Langford 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
This chapter gives an overview of specific statutory regimes that require shareholder approval where directors are conflicted. These include related party provisions, as well as detailed regimes governing directors’ service contracts, substantial property transactions, loans and quasi-loans, credit transactions and related arrangements, and payments for loss of office. Each of these provisions is, in a sense, a more specific enunciation of the broader prohibition on conflicts. These regimes apply to situations in which corporate history has shown that a requirement of board approval was insufficient to combat inherent conflicts, undermining directors’ accountability. Shareholder approval is now therefore required. Securities regulators in each jurisdiction impose additional requirements (such as disclosure) to ensure transparency and fairness. Given that related party regimes deserve a book in their own right this chapter is necessarily an overview. It outlines the UK position and key features of the regimes in Australia and Hong Kong for comparison.
AD HOC Adjudication
Authors: Coulson The Rt Hon. Lord Justice 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
In addition to statutory adjudication under the 1996 Act, and contractual adjudication pursuant to the terms of the contract in question, there is a third way in which parties to a contract can agree, or be deemed to have agreed, to submit their dispute to adjudication. The authorities refer to this as ‘ad hoc adjudication’, a process whereby the parties agree to confer jurisdiction on an adjudicator to decide the particular dispute that has arisen between them. Because this is a matter entirely for the agreement of the parties, such an adjudication may arise under contracts other than construction contracts, or under contracts for the provision of work and services that would otherwise be excluded by the provisions of the 1996 Act.
Costs and Fees
Authors: Coulson The Rt Hon. Lord Justice 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
This part of this chapter addresses four areas of debate which have arisen in the reported cases in connection with the costs of adjudication. There is what might be termed the usual position as to costs; the possibility that the adjudicator has an ad hoc jurisdiction to decide costs; and issues arising out of particular contractual provisions noting a potentially important difference between the law in England and Wales and the law in Scotland. Finally there is a section dealing with s108A of the 1996 Act.
General Principles
Authors: Coulson The Rt Hon. Lord Justice 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
Over the last decade, it has become increasingly common for the losing party in an adjudication to endeavour to avoid the consequences of the adjudicator’s decision by claiming that the decision was reached in breach of the rules of natural justice. Often, the complaints relied on will have first arisen during the adjudication itself, and the adjudicator may have found himself struggling to come to terms with a number of unfamiliar procedural rules, which have their history in administrative law, and can sometimes be extremely difficult to shoehorn into the constrained timetable of an adjudication.
Appeals Before the Court of Justice of the European Union
Authors: Caroline Naômé 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
This book describes the rules governing appeals before the Court of Justice of the European Union. The appeal is the judicial remedy by which a party may contest a decision of the General Court of the European Union. It concerns matters in which the Tribunal has jurisdiction such as, competition, mergers, state aids, access to documents, restrictive measures, EU staff, trade marks, and other areas of intellectual property. This form of judicial remedy was created just over 25 years ago. It is specific to the ECJ, and can only be learned through the case-law. This book is a description of the case-law, and of the rules that the lawyers pleading appeal cases are required to know.
Review Confined to Points of Law
Authors: Naômé Caroline 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
The key characteristic specific to appeals before the Court of Justice (ECJ) is that review is confined to points of law. The Court has no jurisdiction to review the findings of fact or the assessment of the facts. This chapter describes how such a rule was adopted and how it is applied. Since its earliest days as an appellate court, the Court has reviewed the legal characterisation of facts and checked for distortion. It also reviews certain rules relating to evidence, the reasons stated for decisions and the grounds of judgments under appeal. Additionally, this chapter analyses the Court’s review in relation to fines in competition cases, to national law and to contracts. The conclusion reached is that the review confined to points of law limits the jurisdiction of the Court but that it can still review important parts of the General Court’s decision.
Background and Evolution of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)
Authors: Kuner Christopher , Bygrave Lee A , Docksey Christopher 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
This book provides an article-by-article commentary on the EU General Data Protection Regulation (‘GDPR’). Adopted in April 2016 and applicable from May 2018, the GDPR is the centrepiece of the reform of the EU regulatory framework for protection of personal data. While retaining the conceptual framework of the Data Protection Directive 95/46 (‘DPD’) that it replaced, the GDPR represents a major shift in the way that data protection is regulated in EU law. In addition, the GDPR has already become a global benchmark in the field.
Article 4(4). Profiling
Authors: Bygrave Lee A 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
Article 3(2)(b) (Monitoring of data subjects’ behaviour); Article 5 (Principles relating to processing of personal data); Article 6 (Legal grounds for processing of personal data); Article 8 (Conditions applicable to children’s consent in relation to information society services) (see also recital 38); Article 13(2)(f) (Information on the existence of automated decision-making, including profiling) (see also recital 60); Article 14(2)(g) (Information on the existence of automated decision-making, including profiling) (see also recital 60); Article 15(1)(h) (Right of access regarding automated decision-making, including profiling) (see also recital 63); Article 21 (Right to object) (see also recital 70); Article 22 (Automated decision-making, including profiling) (see also recital 71); Article 23 (Restrictions) (see also recital 73); Article 35(3)(a) (Data protection impact assessment) (see also recital 91); Article 47(2)(e) (Binding corporate rules); Article 70(1)(f) (EDPB guidelines on automated decisions based on profiling)/
Article 4(8). Processor
Authors: Bygrave Lee A , Tosoni Luca 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
The ‘processor’ is one of the principal actors in the operationalisation of data protection law and thus deserves specific definition. Indeed, the role of this actor has increased in importance as the GDPR vests processors with more extensive obligations and liability than was the case under the DPD (see e.g. Articles 30(2), 33(2), 37, 79 and 82 GDPR).
Article 4(9). Recipient
Authors: Tosoni Luca 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
Article 13(1)(e) (Information to be provided to data subjects); Article 14(1)(e)–(f) and (3)(c) (Information to be provided to data subjects); Article 15(1)(c) (Right of access by the data subject); Article 19 (Notification regarding rectification or erasure of personal data or restriction of processing); Article 30(1)(d) (Records of processing activities); Article 46(3)(a) (Transfers subject to appropriate safeguards); Article 49(2) (Derogations in the context of transfers of personal data); Article 58(2)(g) and (j) (Powers of supervisory authorities); Article 83(5)(c) (Administrative fines).
Article 4(19). Group of undertakings
Authors: Tosoni Luca 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
Article 4(18) (Definition of ‘enterprise’); Article 4(20) (Definition of ‘binding corporate rules’); Article 36(3)(a) (Prior consultation); Article 37(2) (Designation of the data protection officer); Article 47 (Binding corporate rules); Article 88 (Processing in the context of employment).
Article 4(22). Supervisory authority concerned
Authors: Tosoni Luca 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
Article 4(2) (Definition of ‘processing’); Article 4(21) (Definition of ‘supervisory authority’); Article 4(23) (Definition of ‘cross-border processing’); Article 52 (Independence); Article 56 (Competence of the lead supervisory authority); Article 60 (Cooperation between the lead supervisory authority and the other supervisory authorities concerned); Article 63 (Consistency mechanism) (see too recitals 135 and 138); Article 64 (Opinion of the Board); Article 65 (Dispute resolution by the Board); Article 66 (Urgency procedure); Article 74 (Tasks of the Chair); Article 77 (Right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority).
Article 9 Processing of special categories of personal data
Authors: Georgieva Ludmila , Kuner Christopher 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
Article 4(1) (Definition of personal data); Article 4(2) (Definition of processing); Article 4(11) (Definition of consent); Article 4(13) (Definition of genetic data, see also recital 34); Article 4(14) (Definition of biometric data); Article 4(15) (Definition of data concerning health, see also recital 35); Article 6(4)(c) (Lawfulness of processing, compatibility test) (see too recital 46 on vital interest); Article 13(2)(c) (Information to be provided where personal data are collected from the data subject); Article 17(1)(b), (3)(c) (Right to erasure (‘right to be forgotten’)); Article 20(1)(a) (Right to data portability); Article 22(4) (Automated individual decision-making, including profiling); Article 27(2)(a) (Representatives of controllers or processors not established in the Union); Article 30(5) (Records of processing activities); Article 35(3)(b) (Data protection impact assessment) (see too recital 91); Article 37(1)(c) (Designation of the data protection officer) (see too recital 97); Article 83(5)(a) (General conditions for imposing administrative fines).
Article 10 Processing of personal data relating to criminal convictions and offences
Authors: Georgieva Ludmila 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
Article 5 (Principles relating to processing of personal data); Article 6 (Lawfulness of processing) (see too recital 50); Article 9 (Processing of special categories of personal data); Article 27 (Representatives of controllers or processors not established in the Union) (see too recital 80); Article 30 (Records of processing activities) (see too recital 97); Article 35 (Data protection impact assessment) (see also recitals 75 and 91); Article 37 (Designation of the data protection officer) (see too recital 97).
Article 12 Transparent information, communication and modalities for the exercise of the rights of the data subject
Authors: Polčák Radim 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
Article 11 (Processing which does not require identification); Article 13 (Information to be provided where personal data are collected from the data subject) (see too recitals 60–62); Article 14 (Information to be provided where personal data have not been obtained from the data subject) (see too recital 61); Article 92 (Exercise of the delegation) (see too recital 166).
Article 32 Security of processing
Authors: Burton Cédric 
Published: March 2021

Abstract
Recitals 75–79; recital 88; Article 4(12) (Definition of a personal data breach); Article 28(1) (Choice of processor providing sufficient guarantees) (see too recital 81); Article 28(3)(c) (Processor must be contractually bound to implement security measures); Article 33 (Personal data breach notification requirement to the supervisory authority) (see too recitals 85 and 87); Article 34 (Communication of a personal data breach to the data subject) (see too recital 86).