A hypothetical clinical vignette of delusional disorder: how potential legal issues could be addressed in the United Kingdom and the United States

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 369-372
Author(s):  
Pamela J. Taylor ◽  
Alan R. Felthous
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
Delusional Disorder ◽  
Clinical Vignette ◽  
The United Kingdom

scholarly journals Doctor in the sky: Medico-legal issues during in-flight emergencies

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 65-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcus Wong
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Medical Emergencies

More people are travelling by air and in-flight medical emergencies are becoming more common. Some in-flight emergencies require assistance from passenger doctors who act as good Samaritans in the sky. Their liability and the associated medico-legal issues of providing assistance in mid-flight emergencies are unknown. Although provisions exist in theory about good Samaritans on the ground, it is unclear to what extent these doctrines are applicable to good Samaritans in the sky. This article examines the obligations, liability and legal protection of doctors when acting as good Samaritans in mid-flight emergencies, regardless of their nationalities. It examines the jurisdiction, existing legislations, case law in the United Kingdom and compares with their equivalence in the United States and to some extent, with the legal provisions in France. In addition to in-flight emergencies, this article reviews airlines’ liability for injuries sustained by passengers during flight. It is concluded that doctors’ liability is unclear and uncertain, their legal protection is inadequate and inconsistent; airlines’ liability is restricted by the courts. Reforms proposed include legislative enactment and extension of commercial airliners’ insurance to accord the deficient legal protection.

scholarly journals A Comparative Discussion of the Judicial Disqualification of Directors under the South African Companies Act

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Rehana Cassim
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
South African ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
The United States ◽  
The South ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Locus Standi

Abstract Section 162 of the South African Companies Act 71 of 2008 empowers courts to declare directors delinquent and hence to disqualify them from office. This article compares the judicial disqualification of directors under this section with the equivalent provisions in the United Kingdom, Australia and the United States of America, which have all influenced the South African act. The article compares the classes of persons who have locus standi to apply to court to disqualify a director from holding office, as well as the grounds for the judicial disqualification of a director, the duration of the disqualification, the application of a prescription period and the discretion conferred on courts to disqualify directors from office. It contends that, in empowering courts to disqualify directors from holding office, section 162 of the South African Companies Act goes too far in certain respects.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document