Severability: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{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 {{t|contract}} which obliged its participants to do llegal things is void and unenforceable as a matter of pubic policy. | {{a|boilerplate| | ||
[[File:Shears.png|thumb|Some [[dagging]] shears yesterday, suitable for severing things.]] | |||
}}{{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 {{t|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 | So if you hire an assassin to kill your spouse and the assassin fails to, don’t expect [[Queen’s Bench Division|her majesty’s courts]] to grant you [[damages]], much less the [[Courts of chancery|courts of equity]] to award [[specific performance]]. | ||
Straightforward enough. But, still hypotheticals fester, at least 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? | Straightforward enough. But, still hypotheticals fester, at least 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 [[Illegality|illegal]]? | ||
These are the real world concerns to which modern lawyers turn their minds. Gratifying, isn’t it. | These are the real world concerns to which modern lawyers turn their minds. Gratifying, isn’t it. | ||
Revision as of 09:42, 29 April 2020
|
Boilerplate Anatomy™
|
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 spouse and the assassin fails to, don’t expect her majesty’s courts to grant you damages, much less the courts of equity to award specific performance.
Straightforward enough. But, still hypotheticals fester, at least 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. Gratifying, isn’t it.