82,891
edits
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. | {{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 wife and the assassin fails to, don’t expect her majesty’s courts to grant you damages, much less the courts of equity [[specific performance]]. | So if you hire an assassin to kill your wife and the assassin fails to, don’t expect 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 | 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? | ||
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. Gratifying, isn’t it. |