Greenclose v National Westminster Bank plc: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{fullanat2|isda|electronic messages|2002|Electronic messages|1992}}
{{fullanat2|isda|electronic messages|2002|Electronic messages|1992}}{{cn}}
A fine example of that old legal maxim ''[[anus matronae parvae malas leges faciunt]]'': Little old ladies (and, in this case, aggrieved Welsh hotel owners) make bad law, {{casenote|Greenclose|National Westminster Bank plc}} ([https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2014/1156.html&query=(title:(+greenclose+)) judgment]) opines on the apparently harmless {{isdaprov|Notices}} Section ({{isdaprov|12}}) of the {{1992ma}}. It considers the meaning of “[[electronic messaging system]]” and, saucily, finds that it does not include [[email]].
A fine example of that old legal maxim ''[[anus matronae parvae malas leges faciunt]]'': Little old ladies (and, in this case, aggrieved Welsh hotel owners) make bad law, {{casenote|Greenclose|National Westminster Bank plc}} ([https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2014/1156.html&query=(title:(+greenclose+)) judgment]) opines on the apparently harmless {{isdaprov|Notices}} Section ({{isdaprov|12}}) of the {{1992ma}}. It considers the meaning of “[[electronic messaging system]]” and, saucily, finds that it does not include [[email]].