Severability: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Created page with "Profound ontological uncertainty writ large. If ''one'' aspect of my contract becomes somehow unenforceable, what does that mean for the rest of it? A question that festers..."
 
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
Profound ontological uncertainty writ large.  If ''one'' aspect of my contract becomes somehow unenforceable, what does that mean for the rest of it?
{{t|Profound ontological uncertainty} writ large.  If ''one'' aspect of my {{t|contract}} is illegal, what does that mean for the rest of it? This is really a way of looking at the question of illegality, the general proposition for which is that a contract which obliged its participants to do llegal things is void and unenforceable as a matter of pubic policy.


A question that festers away in the minds of [[Mediocre lawyer|assiduous draftspeople]] the world over, but not one which often troubles the judiciary. This is really a way of looking at the question of illegality. The general proposition is that a legal contract the performance of which is illegal is void and unenforceable as a matter of pubic policy.
So if you hire an assassin to kill your wife and the assassin fails to, don’t expect her majesty’s courts to help you find restitution.


But what if only a teeny little bit of it is illegal?
Straightforward enough. But, still hypotheticals fester away in the minds of [[Mediocre lawyer|assiduous draftspeople]] the world over, but not one which often troubles the judiciary. What if only a teeny little bit of it is illegal?


These are the real world concerns to which  modern lawyers turn their minds.
These are the real world concerns to which  modern lawyers turn their minds.

Revision as of 12:35, 16 October 2017

{{t|Profound ontological uncertainty} writ large. If one aspect of my contract is illegal, what does that mean for the rest of it? This is really a way of looking at the question of illegality, the general proposition for which is that a contract which obliged its participants to do llegal things is void and unenforceable as a matter of pubic policy.

So if you hire an assassin to kill your wife and the assassin fails to, don’t expect her majesty’s courts to help you find restitution.

Straightforward enough. But, still hypotheticals fester away in the minds of assiduous draftspeople the world over, but not one which often troubles the judiciary. What if only a teeny little bit of it is illegal?

These are the real world concerns to which modern lawyers turn their minds.