Here it is on Youtube: some wonderful metaphors.
Will the Slaw community do a rebuttal?
[click on the author's name for more information] 2 Comments on “Berring's Scepticism on the Future of Free Legal Information” |
the count:
John N. Davis on Queen's Counsel Appointments John Gregory on Queen's Counsel Appointments John N. Davis on Queen's Counsel Appointments Simon Fodden on The Courts and Social Media Edwin Jones on Internet Access as a Human Right John G on The Courts and Social Media Chad Mitchell on The Myth of the Visionary Managing Partner John Gregory on Queen's Counsel Appointments m. diane kindree on Queen's Counsel Appointments Connie Crosby on Firm Takes Fresh Approach With Website David Cheifetz on Firm Takes Fresh Approach With Website Connie Crosby on Firm Takes Fresh Approach With Website David Cheifetz on Firm Takes Fresh Approach With Website Connie Crosby on Should There Be Parttime Law School in Canada? Gilaine St-Cyr Schneider on Systemic Discrimination in Law Firms: Perception or Reality? My Point of View SlawTips |
|
|
||
You can read here a reply from the pioneers among the "volunteers"
People trained only in the common law, and who do not spend time litigating, greatly overvalue the utility of finding all the remotely relevant precedent and weaving into a package. First, the transaction costs of solving legal problems are seldom worth it and are beyond the reach of almost everyone. Second, judges make up their own minds about what they want to do, and find a way to do it. No amount of intellectual basket weaving by counsel will overcome that. I could tell you stories, but ask any litigator- ultimately the case is about what the judge says it is about, and there is no such thing as binding precedent.
Think about the simplicity of the civil law- in theory there is doctrine and precedent, but the concept that you can have the basic law in one book cuts a lot of Gordian knots and hyper-expensive legal pretexts. And is civil law justice any worse because the entire law of torts is one sentence?"Every person who by his fault causes harm to another is liable"
I'm glad scholars are thinking about the law and linking it together, and I appreciate the insights, but the only ones which help when the court opens are the ones which will persuade a judge with a job to do, and no amount of precedent will do that on its own.