Legal WTFs?!

[Sagacious]

I thought I'd kick off a thread with examples of things legal the make your head snap back around and go WTF?!

Here's my first one. It is a transcript of a decision from the Supreme Court of Judicature in the UK in the matter of Binder v. Binder (http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2001/2057.html&query=binder)

The relevant paragraph is paragraph 13 and in part it reads:



His delusion that he is the Lord of the Jedi, battling against numerous evil forces, appears to be an important factor in his current inability, under stress, to deal logically with matters concerning his family. He makes assumptions about people without proper knowledge.



Mr. Binder ultimately made it to the Supreme Court of Judicature in the UK and his Honour Lord Justice Ward commented:

It was as Lord Vader that he appeared before me today and I was happy to allow him to do so.

Seems Mr Binder's philosophies have changed since he appeared before the Court in 2001 --- Darth Vader fighting evil?! WTF?!

If anyone has any other such WTF?! legal tidbits post them here.

[ShinymetalASS]

Still reckon Denning's pro-cricket judgement in that nuisance case was a thing of beauty. I cant remember the name since I did torts so long ago and cant be arsed finding the citation on the web, but all you law talkin people know it, and Im sure there's some law student out there who has relished learning that crap. :D I love Denning. What a funny old bastard, considering his time, place and station in the world. Love him for the same reasons as Churchill.

A practical WTF can be found in the wonderful world of conveyancing in Queensland, where to provide cheque details for a settlement, quite often when selling you need a loan payout figure from a bank in order to know exactly for what amounts cheques will need to be drawn. Conversely, when buying, you need to provide those same cheque details to the bank so that they know what cheques they will need to draw.

Why the fuck then, are there banks that will only provide a payout figure on the day of settlement, and that same bank will insist on having cheque details for a purchase the day before. Makes it a logistical nightmare. I hate banks. They might not be a specific legal WTF, but they certainly make a lot of people in the legal industry go WTF.

Sorry, that's my little rant, feel free to move it elsewhere if need be!

[Whiskers]

Still reckon Denning's pro-cricket judgement in that nuisance case was a thing of beauty. I cant remember the name since I did torts so long ago and cant be arsed finding the citation on the web, but all you law talkin people know it, and Im sure there's some law student out there who has relished learning that crap. :D I love Denning. What a funny old bastard, considering his time, place and station in the world. Love him for the same reasons as Churchill.



Miller v Jackson- [1977] 1 QB 966
In a nutshell- balls flowing from a cricket ground can break all your windows and you can't do a thing about it because cricket is in the public interest.

It has been expressly rejected (Kennaway v Thompson [1981] QB 88)

Oh and yes, I relished learning this crap- highlights the contextual nature of the development of the common law.

[ShinymetalASS]

>Some of these you may have read before, others are new.

>These are from a book called Disorder in the American Courts, and are

>things people actually said in court, word for word, taken down and now

>published by court reporters who had the torment of staying calm while

>these exchanges were actually taking place.

>

>ATTORNEY: Are you sexually active?

>WITNESS: No, I just lie there.

> ______________________________

>

>ATTORNEY: What is your date of birth?

>WITNESS: July 18th.

>ATTORNEY: What year?

>WITNESS: Every year.

> _____________________________________

>

>ATTORNEY: What gear were you in at the moment of the impact?

>WITNESS: Gucci sweats and Reeboks.

> ______________________________________

>

>ATTORNEY: This myasthenia gravis, does it affect your memory at all?

>WITNESS: Yes.

>ATTORNEY: And in what ways does it affect your memory?

>WITNESS: I forget.

>ATTORNEY: You forget? Can you give us an example of something you

>forgot?

> _____________________________________

>

>ATTORNEY: How old is your son, the one living with you?

>WITNESS: Thirty-eight or thirty-five, I can't remember which.

>ATTORNEY: How long has he lived with you?

>WITNESS: Forty-five years.

> _____________________________________

>

>ATTORNEY: What was the first thing your husband said to you that

>morning?

>WITNESS: He said, "Where am I, Cathy?"

>ATTORNEY: And why did that upset you?

>WITNESS: My name is Susan.

> ______________________________________

>

>ATTORNEY: Do you know if your daughter has ever been involved in voodoo?

>WITNESS: We both do.

>ATTORNEY: Voodoo?

>WITNESS: We do.

>ATTORNEY: You do?

>WITNESS: Yes, voodoo.

> ______________________________________

>

>ATTORNEY: Now doctor, isn't it true that when a person dies in his

>sleep, he doesn't know about it until the next morning?

>WITNESS: Did you actually pass the bar exam?

> ___________________________________

>

>ATTORNEY: The youngest son, the twenty-year-old, how old is he?

>WITNESS: Uh, he's twenty-one..

> ________________________________________

>

>ATTORNEY: Were you present when your picture was taken?

>WITNESS: Would you repeat the question?

> ______________________________________

>

>ATTORNEY: So the date of conception (of the baby) was August 8th?

>WITNESS: Yes.

>ATTORNEY: And what were you doing at that time?

>WITNESS: Uh....

> ______________________________________

>

>ATTORNEY: She had three children, right?

>WITNESS: Yes.

>ATTORNEY: How many were boys?

>WITNESS: None.

>ATTORNEY: Were there any girls?

> ______________________________________

>

>ATTORNEY: How was your first marriage terminated?

>WITNESS: By death.

>ATTORNEY: And by whose death was it terminated?

> ______________________________________

>

>ATTORNEY: Can you describe the individual?

>WITNESS: He was about medium height and had a beard.

>ATTORNEY: Was this a male or a female?

> ______________________________________

>

>ATTORNEY: Is your appearance here this morning pursuant to a deposition

>notice which I sent to your attorney?

>WITNESS: No, this is how I dress when I go to work.

> ______________________________________

>

>ATTORNEY: Doctor, how many of your autopsies have you performed on dead

>people?

>WITNESS: All my autopsies are performed on dead people.

> ______________________________________

>

>ATTORNEY: ALL your responses MUST be oral, OK? What school did you go

>to?

>WITNESS: Oral.

> ______________________________________

>

>ATTORNEY: Do you recall the time that you examined the body?

>WITNESS: The autopsy started around 8:30 p.m.

>ATTORNEY: And Mr. Denton was dead at the time?

>WITNESS: No, he was sitting on the table wondering why I was doing an

>autopsy on him!

> ______________________________________

>

>ATTORNEY: Are you qualified to give a urine sample?

>WITNESS: Huh?

>

> ______________________________________

>

>ATTORNEY: Doctor, before you performed the autopsy, did you check for a

>pulse?

>WITNESS: No.

>ATTORNEY: Did you check for blood pressure?

>WITNESS: No.

>ATTORNEY Did you check for breathing?

>WITNESS: No.

>ATTORNEY: So, then it is possible that the patient was alive when you

>began the autopsy?

>WITNESS: No.

>ATTORNEY: How can you be so sure, Doctor?

>WITNESS: Because his brain was sitting on my desk in a jar.

>ATTORNEY: But could the patient have still been alive, nevertheless?

>WITNESS: Yes, it is possible that he could have been alive and practising law somewhere

[Aurelius]

Why the fuck then, are there banks that will only provide a payout figure on the day of settlement, and that same bank will insist on having cheque details for a purchase the day before. Makes it a logistical nightmare. I hate banks. They might not be a specific legal WTF, but they certainly make a lot of people in the legal industry go WTF.


Shiny,
I'm not 100% sure of your question, but I do know that my former wife found that real estate sales would always go thru over the weekend, so the bank had 2-3 days to play with the money on the overnight markets. Maybe it's linked to that.