29 January 2014

The Judge and the Novelist

Aspects of the Novel compiles lectures delivered by EM Forster arranged as a conversational-styled monograph. The result is informative and witty. Chapter six begins with an epigram that may help explain the judicial duty. So next, that extract is quoted and afterwards annotated.

25 January 2014

Mezopotamya v Turkey: Strasbourg's Defence Against Abusive Government

Two applicants alleged breaches of various rights enshrined in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950 (ECHR). The European Court of Human Rights (Strasbourg or ECtHR) decided only the second applicant's ECHR Article 10 right to freedom of expression was violated. The second applicant (Mesopotamia) was a publishing company. Mesopotamia was dissolved by a domestic Turkish civil court and its property was seized pursuant to a prosecution in a domestic Turkish criminal court.

This post analyses Strasbourg's reasons for holding that Turkey violated Article 10. First I exposit the ECtHR's process. Second I analyse Turkey's procedural irregularities. Third, I compare these against and with the dissenting opinion. Finally, I explain my reasons for supporting the majority opinion.

22 January 2014

A List of Law Essay Ingredients

This posts collects several of my articles on writing law essays. Each of these offers some observations on writing about law in university. In my writing schedule, though, weeks pass between similar ideas. This post therefore aims to present my ideas about legal writing ingredients in an order that may improve their coherence.

18 January 2014

How to Plan and Write a Law Essay: Bentham's Lessons

In this post I expand upon PS Atiyah's exposition of Jeremy Bentham's method. Disregarding criticism of Bentham's utilitarianism, I focus on the technique that law students may derive from Bentham's work. This post therefore offers advice for planning essays, by explaining how to collect and write an essay's constituent parts, which can then be rearranged to create the final product.

15 January 2014

Edited Judgmental Appendix

In 'V v Judgments' I wrote about a quaint legal tradition. At the time I vaguely recalled passing a similar remark elsewhere but could not find the reference. After a few months of searching, I re-read an old book, and the text reappeared!

That book is Lon Fuller's Anatomy of the Law, and the following quotes are from page 11, under the heading, 'Law as a dimension of human life' (p 10). This post splits, edits, and comments on his analysis, to help justify the need to use legal language to students.

11 January 2014

Law Sounds and Philosophy

This post is a playful attempt to explain how to use philosophy to illuminate and elucidate legal problems. Philosophy, here, should be broadly interpreted: at least to include legal theory. For any readers who arrived here in search for music, check out Daylight Robbery Records and listen as you read.

8 January 2014

Wodehouse: Two Blandings and Comments

This post comments on two Blandings novels by PG Wodehouse--my first addition to a proposed 'Reading List'. I planned to title this post 'Whorehouse and the Fresh Uncle'. But two letters from accuracy is difficult to explain as a mistake when the words aren't proper homonyms. Moreover, it seemed a little crass so soon after James Avery's passing. For those who don't know, Avery played Will Smith's Uncle Phil in 'The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air'.

4 January 2014

Exit Reading List

The 'Reading List' page on this site currently lists the books in a to-read pile by my bed and a completed stack next to it. The list is always incomplete because I read materials faster than I update the record. This post explains why the 'Reading List' page in its current form is a pointless task, then outlines changes to improve my project.

1 January 2014

Misled Pretentiousness

The previous post, 'Spirits and Legal Articulation', leads to a problem that I cannot yet solve: law requires a technically defined and precise lexicon, which leads some to claim that law must deny certain relationships with non-legal writing. Law's technicality, however, does not mean, beyond the required lexicon, that all common usages must be excluded. Contrarily, lay-phrases and popular language constructions may render legal writing more fluent and readable. (This is not a call for clich├ęs.) This post considers the false opposition attributed to legal and non-legal writing styles.