Talk:Ultra vires

Law Mid‑importance

	Law portal 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.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Latin Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Latin, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Latin on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LatinWikipedia:WikiProject LatinTemplate:WikiProject LatinLatin articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Unexplained list[edit]

The first numbered list could do with an introduction. It is unclear to me what it is a list of. --SandStone (talk) 03:08, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ultra vires[edit]

Just thought I'd mention that "sparking a raft of satellite litigation" is quite a cocktail of metaphors. 134.134.139.71 (talk) 19:49, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You do realize that the satellite capsules in which men have orbited Earth, and the Space Shuttle, have life rafts on them? ... and that the engines are lit by a spark of ignition? <wink> (agree that "plethora" might be better.) Unimaginative Username (talk) 07:26, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Executory, or Executed?[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Modern Times Ultra Vires in Canada[edit]

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)[reply]

Intro[edit]

The introduction doesn't concisely explain what the phrase means. If theres a latin definition but it's used in common law, there should be a comprable plain english definition of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.132.80.134 (talk) 21:09, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From the standpoint of an American law student, this article is not helpful. In the field of corporate law, this is an accurate description of what "ultra vires" means... this wiki article's description of what "ultra vires means in American law" is not accurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.240.84.98 (talk) 02:12, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article should also state whether "ultra vires" applies only within common law, or also within other law systesm. (I myself do not know.) Acwilson9 (talk) 04:58, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There exist controversies in several EU member strates[edit]

Several governments and their constitutional tribunals claim that the EU has limited entitlements. Xx236 (talk) 11:23, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://verfassungsblog.de/ultra-vires-control-and-european-democracy/ Xx236 (talk) 11:23, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.law.ox.ac.uk/business-law-blog/blog/2020/06/whatever-it-takes-under-ultra-vires-scrutiny-german-constitutional Xx236 (talk) 11:24, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://kluwerlawonline.com/journalarticle/Common+Market+Law+Review/48.2/COLA2011018 Xx236 (talk) 11:25, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

de:Ultra-vires-Akt contains many references.Xx236 (talk) 11:26, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]