Re Spectrum Plus: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
While the court didn’t rule out the idea of prospective overruling —“‘Never say never’ is a wise judicial precept, in the interests of all citizens of the country” — this present case was “miles away from the exceptional category in which alone prospective overruling would be legitimate”. | While the court didn’t rule out the idea of prospective overruling —“‘Never say never’ is a wise judicial precept, in the interests of all citizens of the country” — this present case was “miles away from the exceptional category in which alone prospective overruling would be legitimate”. | ||
So no, fellas. Natwest, you are shit out of luck.<ref>Being shit out of luck is something of a habit of Natwest’s — see [[Greenclose v National Westminster Bank plc - Case Note|Greenclose]] | So no, fellas. Natwest, you are shit out of luck.<ref>Being shit out of luck is something of a habit of Natwest’s — see [[Greenclose v National Westminster Bank plc - Case Note|Greenclose]]</ref> | ||
==[[Fixed charge|Fixed]] and [[Floating charge|floating]] [[charges]]== | ==[[Fixed charge|Fixed]] and [[Floating charge|floating]] [[charges]]== | ||