Resurfice Corp. v. Hanke, 2007 SCC 7 (Lionel Smith, 14 Feb 2007)

Of course it's just a tree. What does it look like ?

RDG online
Restitution Discussion Group Archives

Restitution
front page

What's new?

Another tree!

Archive front page

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2007

2006

2008

2009

Another tree!

<== Previous message Back to index Next message ==>

Sender:	Lionel Smith
Date:	Wed, 14 Feb 2007 09:27:34 -0500
Re:	Resurfice Corp. v. Hanke, 2007 SCC 7

On the subject of spilled academic ink, I was looking yesterday at the transcripts of argument in the High Court of Australia in the Say-Dee case (they are on www.austlii.org) and I thought others might find this exchange amusing:

GUMMOW J: So what is the connection between the first limb and tracing ideas?
MR DOUGLAS: Well, the academic commentaries dwell upon this and they - - -
GUMMOW J: Forget about them. As a matter of basic principle, what is the connection? A lot of the academic writing is totally confusing ... a prejudiced view.

Lionel

--
California Civil Code
3546. Things happen according to the ordinary course of nature and the ordinary habits of life.
3547. A thing continues to exist as long as is usual with things of that nature.

<== Previous message Back to index Next message ==>

" These messages are all © their authors. Nothing in them constitutes legal advice, to anyone, on any topic, least of all Restitution. Be warned that very few propositions in Restitution command universal agreement, and certainly not this one. Have a nice day! "

»
»
»
»
»

For editorial policy, see here.
For the unedited archive, see here.
The archive editor is Steve Hedley.