Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* CrypticBackgroundReference: As in real judgements, there are references to earlier cases that set precedents. For example, "The Laywers' Dream" has one judge quote "Silvertop v. The Stepney Guardians", in which it was apparently ruled that training a parrot to insult someone is libel rather than slander. Some of the cases quoted are fictional, some real.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 18 (click to see context) from:
* HisNameIs: In "The Lawyers' Dream", Lord Goat collapses from a heart attack just as he is about to deliver the deciding vote in the question of whether an audio recording is libel or slander.
to:
* HisNameIs: In "The Lawyers' Dream", Lord Goat collapses perishes from a heart attack just as he is about to deliver the deciding vote in the question of whether an audio recording is libel or slander.slander.
* ItsNotPornItsArt: Inverted in ''Rex v. The Head Master of Eton'' in which the Classics master of an exclusive BoardingSchool is charged with not only possession of lewd books (i.e. all those stories about pagan gods lying with maidens in the form of animals), but sharing them with minors. The magistrates rule that it's not art, it's porn.
* ItsNotPornItsArt: Inverted in ''Rex v. The Head Master of Eton'' in which the Classics master of an exclusive BoardingSchool is charged with not only possession of lewd books (i.e. all those stories about pagan gods lying with maidens in the form of animals), but sharing them with minors. The magistrates rule that it's not art, it's porn.
Changed line(s) 43,44 (click to see context) from:
* TakeThatCritics: In "Trott v Tulip", a judge instructs the jury not to discriminate against a critic:
-->You were invited by the plaintiff's counsel to consider upon a somewhat higher plane the activities of Miss Trott, which are admittedly creative, than those of Mrs. Tulip, as being chiefly occupied in tearing to pieces the things which other men have made. But this distinction, however attractive to the lay mind, I must ask you to dismiss from your own. In many ponderous and ill‑drafted enactments our ancestors have been careful to secure to the most repellent of the King's subjects the common rights of free expression so long as it takes the harmless form of venomous and enraging words.
-->You were invited by the plaintiff's counsel to consider upon a somewhat higher plane the activities of Miss Trott, which are admittedly creative, than those of Mrs. Tulip, as being chiefly occupied in tearing to pieces the things which other men have made. But this distinction, however attractive to the lay mind, I must ask you to dismiss from your own. In many ponderous and ill‑drafted enactments our ancestors have been careful to secure to the most repellent of the King's subjects the common rights of free expression so long as it takes the harmless form of venomous and enraging words.
to:
* TakeThatCritics: TakeThatCritics:
** In "Trott v Tulip", a judge instructs the jury not to discriminate against a critic:
-->You --->You were invited by the plaintiff's counsel to consider upon a somewhat higher plane the activities of Miss Trott, which are admittedly creative, than those of Mrs. Tulip, as being chiefly occupied in tearing to pieces the things which other men have made. But this distinction, however attractive to the lay mind, I must ask you to dismiss from your own. In many ponderous and ill‑drafted enactments our ancestors have been careful to secure to the most repellent of the King's subjects the common rights of free expression so long as it takes the harmless form of venomous and enraging words.words.
** ''Suet v Haddock'' and ''Bacon v Egg; Kidney v Egg'' both have judges summing up against critics, with damages of £10,000 being awarded against unfavourable reviews.
** In "Trott v Tulip", a judge instructs the jury not to discriminate against a critic:
** ''Suet v Haddock'' and ''Bacon v Egg; Kidney v Egg'' both have judges summing up against critics, with damages of £10,000 being awarded against unfavourable reviews.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* FamedInStory: In the later cases, Mr Haddock has gained enough of a reputation that one judge perks up when he sees his name on the order paper, looking forward to "some jolly litigation."
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 35 (click to see context) from:
* SelfDeprecation: In ''Trott v Tulip'', the judge recalls the evidence of Mr Haddock: "[W]ho told us that he was a humorous writer, but produced no evidence to support the statement."
to:
* SelfDeprecation: SelfDeprecation:
** In ''Trott v Tulip'', the judge recalls the evidence of Mr Haddock: "[W]ho told us that he was a humorous writer, but produced no evidence to support the statement.""
** In "Crime in the Commons", Haddock refers to the real-life case ''Rex v. Sir R F Graham-Campbell and others. Ex parte Herbert (1935) 1 KB 594'' as being brought by "an ill-disciplined author named Herbert".
** In ''Trott v Tulip'', the judge recalls the evidence of Mr Haddock: "[W]ho told us that he was a humorous writer, but produced no evidence to support the statement.
** In "Crime in the Commons", Haddock refers to the real-life case ''Rex v. Sir R F Graham-Campbell and others. Ex parte Herbert (1935) 1 KB 594'' as being brought by "an ill-disciplined author named Herbert".
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
* ArsonMurderAndJaywalking: In ''Rex v Jackson'':
-->'''Sir Ethelred:''' The coroner, I say, was not content to establish the cause of death, but conducted a minute enquiry into the habits, social life, and moral outlook of all the relations of the deceased woman and as many of her friends as could be identified and brought to the court; also he made a long speech about greyhound-racing.
-->'''Sir Ethelred:''' The coroner, I say, was not content to establish the cause of death, but conducted a minute enquiry into the habits, social life, and moral outlook of all the relations of the deceased woman and as many of her friends as could be identified and brought to the court; also he made a long speech about greyhound-racing.
Changed line(s) 23 (click to see context) from:
** In ''Rex v Cochran'' and ''Rex v [[UsefulNotes/DavidLloydGeorge George]], [[UsefulNotes/RamsayMacDonald MacDonald]], Maxton and others'', the jury return their verdict without retiring.
to:
** In ''Rex v Cochran'' and Cochran'', ''Rex v [[UsefulNotes/DavidLloydGeorge George]], [[UsefulNotes/RamsayMacDonald MacDonald]], Maxton and others'', others'' and ''Rex v Jackson'', the jury return their verdict without retiring.leaving the box.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* RageBreakingPoint: In ''Willow v Capital Pictures Corporation'', Mr Justice Wool (who's just had a pay cut) is in no mood to sympathise with Miss Willow, who's been paid his entire annual salary for five weeks' work, and goes on a pages-long rant about how underpaid judges are before shutting down the court in protest.
Added DiffLines:
* SternOldJudge: Given the time period, most of the judges can be assumed to be. Mr Justice Wool moves into GrumpyOldMan territory; his temper is not helped by his tendency to hay fever.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 23 (click to see context) from:
** Another in ''Rex v Cochran'', in which the jury return their verdict without retiring.
to:
** Another in In ''Rex v Cochran'', in which Cochran'' and ''Rex v [[UsefulNotes/DavidLloydGeorge George]], [[UsefulNotes/RamsayMacDonald MacDonald]], Maxton and others'', the jury return their verdict without retiring.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 11 (click to see context) from:
* CouldHaveAvoidedThisPlot: "The Lady Chancellor" records a dispute between a newly-appointed Chancellor, who finds the [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woolsack Woolsack]] uncomfortable and wants to replace it with a chair, and her fellow Law Lords who argue for tradition. At the end, she carries her point and the Woolsack is removed -- only for one of her colleagues to point out that she didn't need to be sitting on it in the first place.
to:
* CouldHaveAvoidedThisPlot: "The "Enter The Lady Chancellor" records a dispute between a newly-appointed Chancellor, who finds the [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woolsack Woolsack]] uncomfortable and wants to replace it with a chair, and her fellow Law Lords who argue for tradition. At the end, she carries her point and the Woolsack is removed -- only for one of her colleagues to point out that she didn't need to be sitting on it in the first place.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 11 (click to see context) from:
* CouldHaveAvoidedAllThisPlot: "The Lady Chancellor" records a dispute between a newly-appointed Chancellor, who finds the [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woolsack Woolsack]] uncomfortable and wants to replace it with a chair, and her fellow Law Lords who argue for tradition. At the end, she carries her point and the Woolsack is removed -- only for one of her colleagues to point out that she didn't need to be sitting on it in the first place.
to:
* CouldHaveAvoidedAllThisPlot: CouldHaveAvoidedThisPlot: "The Lady Chancellor" records a dispute between a newly-appointed Chancellor, who finds the [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woolsack Woolsack]] uncomfortable and wants to replace it with a chair, and her fellow Law Lords who argue for tradition. At the end, she carries her point and the Woolsack is removed -- only for one of her colleagues to point out that she didn't need to be sitting on it in the first place.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* CouldHaveAvoidedAllThisPlot: "The Lady Chancellor" records a dispute between a newly-appointed Chancellor, who finds the [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woolsack Woolsack]] uncomfortable and wants to replace it with a chair, and her fellow Law Lords who argue for tradition. At the end, she carries her point and the Woolsack is removed -- only for one of her colleagues to point out that she didn't need to be sitting on it in the first place.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* GratuitousLatin: Like real judges, the judges in ''Uncommon Law'' like to pepper their judgements with legal maxims in untranslated Latin, such as "jus varium, judex opulentus"[[labelnote:Lat.]]Inconsistent law makes judges rich[[/labelnote]] in "The Lawyers' Dream".
Added DiffLines:
* {{Pun}}: If a Latin legal maxim is quoted, it's often in mangled form. For example, "de minimis non curat lex"[[labelnote:Lat.]]The law does not bother with trifles[[/labelnote]] becomes "de ''feminis'' non curat lex"[[labelnote:Lat.]]The law does not care about women[[/labelnote]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* LanguageEqualsThought: In "Exploits of Boot", Mr Justice Swallow emphasises that there is no English term for AgentProvocateur, because "the idea is so repugnant to British notions of fair play and decency that it has never found expression in our language."
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* OurNudityIsDifferent: In a footnote in ''Urban District of Burbleton v Haddock'', Mr Justice Wool goes into a bit of a rant when a man is charged with indecency for entering the sea wearing the "wrong" sort of swimsuit, contrasting the 19th century definition of "indecency" used by the municipal council with a more liberal 1920s definition:
-->'''Mr Justice Wool:''' Stuff and nonsense, constable! The male torso is not indecent. If it is hairy it may be unattractive: but so is the male foot. So is your face; but the Council cannot compel you to drape it. A lady's back is not indecent: it may be attractive, but so are a lady's eyes. The act says "indecency" not "allure". My father wore nothing but drawers. So did I.
-->'''Mr Justice Wool:''' Stuff and nonsense, constable! The male torso is not indecent. If it is hairy it may be unattractive: but so is the male foot. So is your face; but the Council cannot compel you to drape it. A lady's back is not indecent: it may be attractive, but so are a lady's eyes. The act says "indecency" not "allure". My father wore nothing but drawers. So did I.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 17 (click to see context) from:
* NotablyQuickDeliberation: One is described in a footnote.
to:
* NotablyQuickDeliberation: NotablyQuickDeliberation:
** One is described in a footnote.
** One is described in a footnote.
Added DiffLines:
** Another in ''Rex v Cochran'', in which the jury return their verdict without retiring.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* ChewbaccaDefence: Sir Ethelred Rutt conducts one in ''Carrot and Co. v. The Guano Association'', cross-examining an expert witness with a stream of irrelevant questions.
-->[I]t is the general opinion in legal circles that the case will never finish. Had the defendant company been unable to secure his services, it is calculated that the case would have been clearly intelligible from the beginning, and in all probability would have been concluded in a day.
* CourtroomAntics: Both sides' barristers in ''Carrot and Co. v. The Guano Association'' engage in them, constantly thumping the desk, raising their eyebrows and blowing their noses. And that's before Sir Ethelred launches on his ChewbaccaDefence.
-->[I]t is the general opinion in legal circles that the case will never finish. Had the defendant company been unable to secure his services, it is calculated that the case would have been clearly intelligible from the beginning, and in all probability would have been concluded in a day.
* CourtroomAntics: Both sides' barristers in ''Carrot and Co. v. The Guano Association'' engage in them, constantly thumping the desk, raising their eyebrows and blowing their noses. And that's before Sir Ethelred launches on his ChewbaccaDefence.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* AgentProvocateur: Constable Boot, in "Exploits of Boot", who works in plain clothes tempting shopkeepers and bar staff into breaches of the trading laws -- and, in one notable case, seducing a petitioner for divorce:
-->In this case the successful petitioner for a decree ''nisi'' had obstinately retained her virtue for five of the six statutory months, which, for greater security, she passed in a monastical institution. Constable Boot, however, disguised as a St Bernard dog, obtained admission to the nunnery and ultimately to her affections.
-->In this case the successful petitioner for a decree ''nisi'' had obstinately retained her virtue for five of the six statutory months, which, for greater security, she passed in a monastical institution. Constable Boot, however, disguised as a St Bernard dog, obtained admission to the nunnery and ultimately to her affections.
Added DiffLines:
* TheReasonYouSuckSpeech: Mr Justice Swallow's summing-up in "Exploits of Boot" is not only harshly against Boot, but includes numerous comments about how stupid the jury are.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* SnakeOilSalesman: In ''Suet v Haddock'', Mr Suet sells a medicine called 'Sinko', which is "widely advertised as having the power to remove or remedy 'That Sinking Feeling'".
-->The expert medical evidence for the plaintiff is that 'Sinko' is made of ''hydrogenalin'', a new and secret chemical compound. The expert medical testimony for the defence is that 'Sinko' is made from wood-shavings, lubricating oil and bits of straw.
-->The expert medical evidence for the plaintiff is that 'Sinko' is made of ''hydrogenalin'', a new and secret chemical compound. The expert medical testimony for the defence is that 'Sinko' is made from wood-shavings, lubricating oil and bits of straw.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* SelfDeprecation: In ''Trott v Tulip'', the judge recalls the evidence of Mr Haddock: "[W]ho told us that he was a humorous writer, but produced no evidence to support the statement."
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* HaveAGayOldTime: In ''Trott v. Tulip'', the judge mentions "bimbo" and "togg" as examples of words that couldn't be defamatory, because they have no meaning. "Bimbo" has since come to mean BrainlessBeauty, and so could now be defamatory.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 8 (click to see context) from:
* {{Kayfabe}} ''Pratt, G. K. v. Pratt, P. and Mugg'' is a society divorce case where the lawyers and judge are well aware that the legal motions being gone through have no relationship to the true facts. Sir Oliver Slick, who's about to retire and can't be bothered to play along, breaks the kayfabe and explains what's actually going on, much to the consternation of his instructing solicitor.
to:
* {{Kayfabe}} {{Kayfabe}}: ''Pratt, G. K. v. Pratt, P. and Mugg'' is a society divorce case where the lawyers and judge are well aware that the legal motions being gone through have no relationship to the true facts. Sir Oliver Slick, who's about to retire and can't be bothered to play along, breaks the kayfabe and explains what's actually going on, much to the consternation of his instructing solicitor.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 8 (click to see context) from:
* {{Kayfabe}} ''Pratt, G. K. v. Pratt, P. and Mugg'' is a divorce case where the lawyers and judge are well aware that the legal motions being gone through have no relationship to the true facts. Sir Oliver Slick, who's about to retire and doesn't care any more, shocks the judge by breaking kayfabe and telling the actual facts.
to:
* {{Kayfabe}} ''Pratt, G. K. v. Pratt, P. and Mugg'' is a society divorce case where the lawyers and judge are well aware that the legal motions being gone through have no relationship to the true facts. Sir Oliver Slick, who's about to retire and doesn't care any more, shocks can't be bothered to play along, breaks the judge by breaking kayfabe and telling explains what's actually going on, much to the actual facts.consternation of his instructing solicitor.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* {{Kayfabe}} ''Pratt, G. K. v. Pratt, P. and Mugg'' is a divorce case where the lawyers and judge are well aware that the legal motions being gone through have no relationship to the true facts. Sir Oliver Slick, who's about to retire and doesn't care any more, shocks the judge by breaking kayfabe and telling the actual facts.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* BizarreAndImprobableGolfGame: Leads to Mr Haddock being fined £100 under the Profane Oaths Act 1745 after repeatedly failing to get his ball across the "Chasm", a sea inlet that crosses the 12th fairway on the Mullion Golf Course.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* MenAreBetterThanWomen: Played for laughs in ''Fardell v. Potts'', in which the judge rules that the Common Law concept of the "reasonable man" does not apply to women, who can't be expected to behave reasonably.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 17 (click to see context) from:
* WriterOnBoard: "Incorporation of Haddock" is a tract arguing for perpetual copyright.
to:
* WriterOnBoard: WriterOnBoard:
** "Incorporation of Haddock" is a tract arguing for perpetualcopyright.copyright.
** "Not a Crime", the final case in ''Uncommon Law'', drops the humorous tone of the other cases in favour of a more serious attack on the contradictions of divorce law as it stood at the time. Herbert later expanded it into a novel, ''Holy Deadlock''.
** "Incorporation of Haddock" is a tract arguing for perpetual
** "Not a Crime", the final case in ''Uncommon Law'', drops the humorous tone of the other cases in favour of a more serious attack on the contradictions of divorce law as it stood at the time. Herbert later expanded it into a novel, ''Holy Deadlock''.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 16 (click to see context) from:
-->You were invited by the plaintiff's counsel to consider upon a somewhat higher plane the activities of Miss Trott, which are admittedly creative, than those of Mrs. Tulip, as being chiefly occupied in tearing to pieces the things which other men have made. But this distinction, however attractive to the lay mind, I must ask you to dismiss from your own. In many ponderous and ill‑drafted enactments our ancestors have been careful to secure to the most repellent of the King's subjects the common rights of free expression so long as it takes the harmless form of venomous and enraging words.
to:
-->You were invited by the plaintiff's counsel to consider upon a somewhat higher plane the activities of Miss Trott, which are admittedly creative, than those of Mrs. Tulip, as being chiefly occupied in tearing to pieces the things which other men have made. But this distinction, however attractive to the lay mind, I must ask you to dismiss from your own. In many ponderous and ill‑drafted enactments our ancestors have been careful to secure to the most repellent of the King's subjects the common rights of free expression so long as it takes the harmless form of venomous and enraging words.words.
* WriterOnBoard: "Incorporation of Haddock" is a tract arguing for perpetual copyright.
* WriterOnBoard: "Incorporation of Haddock" is a tract arguing for perpetual copyright.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* NotablyQuickDeliberation: One is described in a footnote.
--> In Rex v Strauss (1928) 9 Cr App R 91, a bailiff acting for the Inland Revenue was struck and killed with a book of sermons while removing, from the premises of the accused, a wireless set belonging to the accused; as well as two Rabbits, the property of a favourite daughter. The defence was that distress for income tax was a gross provocation comparable to the discovery of a wife in the arms of another (see Rex v Mouldy, 1 Ventris 158), and such as to produce an uncontrollable impulse depriving a man of the ordinary powers of self-control. The jury, without leaving the box, returned a verdict of 'Justifiable Homicide'; but the following day was Derby Day, and therefore the decision is not regarded as settled law.
--> In Rex v Strauss (1928) 9 Cr App R 91, a bailiff acting for the Inland Revenue was struck and killed with a book of sermons while removing, from the premises of the accused, a wireless set belonging to the accused; as well as two Rabbits, the property of a favourite daughter. The defence was that distress for income tax was a gross provocation comparable to the discovery of a wife in the arms of another (see Rex v Mouldy, 1 Ventris 158), and such as to produce an uncontrollable impulse depriving a man of the ordinary powers of self-control. The jury, without leaving the box, returned a verdict of 'Justifiable Homicide'; but the following day was Derby Day, and therefore the decision is not regarded as settled law.
Added DiffLines:
* RhymesOnADime: In one case, Haddock is given a higher than normal fine for conducting his defence in rhymed couplets.
Added DiffLines:
* ShownTheirWork: Herbert was an actual barrister and MP, and used his knowledge of the law to make the cases as plausible as possible.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* HisNameIs: In "The Lawyers' Dream", Lord Goat collapses from a heart attack just as he is about to deliver the deciding vote in the question of whether an audio recording is libel or slander.
* MisterStrangenoun: A lot of the judges have names like this: Mr Justice Wool, Lord Lick, Lord Arrowroot, Lord Sheep etc.
* MisterStrangenoun: A lot of the judges have names like this: Mr Justice Wool, Lord Lick, Lord Arrowroot, Lord Sheep etc.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 7 (click to see context) from:
* PunBasedTitle: "Uncommon Law" is a play on UsefulNotes/CommonLaw. "Misleading Cases", the title of the original collection, spoofs the term "Leading case" (a case that sets a precedent).
to:
* PunBasedTitle: "Uncommon Law" is a play on UsefulNotes/CommonLaw.UsefulNotes/TheCommonLaw. "Misleading Cases", the title of the original collection, spoofs the term "Leading case" (a case that sets a precedent).
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
"Uncommon Law" is an anthology of satirical law reports by A P Herbert, originally published in ''Magazine/{{Punch}}''. They accurately pastiche the style of genuine court reports of the time, and were used by Herbert to highlight areas where he considered the law needed reform. Some of the cases have become well-known enough to be cited in genuine court decisions.
!! Tropes
* AuthorAvatar: Serial litigant Albert Haddock; it is no coincidence that he shares initials with his creator.
* PoesLaw: At least two cases were reported elsewhere as real court cases. The most famous is "The Negotiable Cow", in which Albert Haddock writes a check to the Inland Revenue on the side of a cow. There was also "Is It a Free Country?" which shocked one American legal commentator who believed a British judge had actually said "It cannot be too clearly understood that this is ''not'' a free country, and it will be an evil day for the legal profession when it is."
* PunBasedTitle: "Uncommon Law" is a play on UsefulNotes/CommonLaw. "Misleading Cases", the title of the original collection, spoofs the term "Leading case" (a case that sets a precedent).
* RulesLawyer: Albert Haddock attempts this with the actual law -- sometimes successfully, sometimes not.
* TakeThatCritics: In "Trott v Tulip", a judge instructs the jury not to discriminate against a critic:
-->You were invited by the plaintiff's counsel to consider upon a somewhat higher plane the activities of Miss Trott, which are admittedly creative, than those of Mrs. Tulip, as being chiefly occupied in tearing to pieces the things which other men have made. But this distinction, however attractive to the lay mind, I must ask you to dismiss from your own. In many ponderous and ill‑drafted enactments our ancestors have been careful to secure to the most repellent of the King's subjects the common rights of free expression so long as it takes the harmless form of venomous and enraging words.
!! Tropes
* AuthorAvatar: Serial litigant Albert Haddock; it is no coincidence that he shares initials with his creator.
* PoesLaw: At least two cases were reported elsewhere as real court cases. The most famous is "The Negotiable Cow", in which Albert Haddock writes a check to the Inland Revenue on the side of a cow. There was also "Is It a Free Country?" which shocked one American legal commentator who believed a British judge had actually said "It cannot be too clearly understood that this is ''not'' a free country, and it will be an evil day for the legal profession when it is."
* PunBasedTitle: "Uncommon Law" is a play on UsefulNotes/CommonLaw. "Misleading Cases", the title of the original collection, spoofs the term "Leading case" (a case that sets a precedent).
* RulesLawyer: Albert Haddock attempts this with the actual law -- sometimes successfully, sometimes not.
* TakeThatCritics: In "Trott v Tulip", a judge instructs the jury not to discriminate against a critic:
-->You were invited by the plaintiff's counsel to consider upon a somewhat higher plane the activities of Miss Trott, which are admittedly creative, than those of Mrs. Tulip, as being chiefly occupied in tearing to pieces the things which other men have made. But this distinction, however attractive to the lay mind, I must ask you to dismiss from your own. In many ponderous and ill‑drafted enactments our ancestors have been careful to secure to the most repellent of the King's subjects the common rights of free expression so long as it takes the harmless form of venomous and enraging words.
