Kelly v Solari: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{a|stupid banker|}}A stupid banker case — strictly speaking, a stupid insurance broker , but who’s counting? — ''also'' involving a ''little old lady''. So that...") |
(No difference)
|
Revision as of 12:00, 12 March 2021
|
A stupid banker case — strictly speaking, a stupid insurance broker , but who’s counting? — also involving a little old lady. So that rare thing where both counterpoint maxims of legal probity apply at once: hard cheese for big dogs, and little old ladies make bad law. You normally only require one for a curious result. Imagine what happens when you get two. Curiously, they seem to cancel each other out.