might i add the elusive place on the editorial board of the law journalhttp://www.unswlawjournal.unsw.edu.au/lj2/members.asp. >.<Frigid said:yeah i know, but i assure you it will be a tough fight to get first class honours this year... >.<
might i add the elusive place on the editorial board of the law journalhttp://www.unswlawjournal.unsw.edu.au/lj2/members.asp. >.<Frigid said:yeah i know, but i assure you it will be a tough fight to get first class honours this year... >.<
Every single person who I know interviewed for the Melbourne University Law Review got rejected, myself included.Frigid said:might i add the elusive place on the editorial board of the law journal. >.<
If a lawyer takes advantage of a hole in the law, then the law is not being broken.EbonyTW said:Knowing something inside and out often leaves room for wrong doing...
Did you not read the previous posts? - That's about the wankiest thing I've ever heard.hfis said:If a lawyer takes advantage of a hole in the law, then the law is not being broken.
Law and justice are two very, very different things. I study law.
I hate you.....lolhfis said:I study law.
If they weren't careful enough, hadn't done their research, if they hadn't fulfilled their duties properly, then it would indeed be against the law.doink said:Well Let's see it's not against the law for doctor's to accidentally administer the wrong medicine is it? Does that mean it's ok to do it?
It's called negligence. Hell, you could probably bring it under recklessley inflicting GBH or manslaughter, depending on the after effects.doink said:Well Let's see it's not against the law for doctor's to accidentally administer the wrong medicine is it? Does that mean it's ok to do it?
funny how doctors can be negligent yet lawyers can't. Imagine if you could sue lawyers for defamation for everything they said in court... Wait can you?hfis said:It's called negligence. Hell, you could probably bring it under recklessley inflicting GBH or manslaughter, depending on the after effects.
Edit: Beaten. That's what I get for not refreshing the page before posting.
There are a lot of problems with being able to sue lawyers - not least of all that, if you could say your lawyer did or did not do something in particular, it throws the judgment into doubt and the entire case might have to be retried, and opened up again for litigation against them, and statements reused and people re-examined and the case gets endlessly thrown around in the system.doink said:funny how doctors can be negligent yet lawyers can't. Imagine if you could sue lawyers for defamation for everything they said in court... Wait can you?
You are in your first semester of law, I assume?jackmurray1989 said:Did you not read the previous posts? - That's about the wankiest thing I've ever heard.
'Professional misconduct', 'professional negligence' and 'negligent misstatements' are all terms which come to mind here. It's easy to sue a lawyer for negligence; you just can't say "oh, I lost my case because my lawyer said x instead of y (even though that's what the law at the time said they should do), therefore they're negligent."doink said:funny how doctors can be negligent yet lawyers can't. Imagine if you could sue lawyers for defamation for everything they said in court... Wait can you?
But what about advocate's immunity?hfis said:'Professional misconduct', 'professional negligence' and 'negligent misstatements' are all terms which come to mind here. It's easy to sue a lawyer for negligence; you just can't say "oh, I lost my case because my lawyer said x instead of y (even though that's what the law at the time said they should do), therefore they're negligent."
The pretentious fucks think they're top shit yet everyday they complain about the work-load, how they can't go out and party and socialize.The Arrogant Tosser
Arrogant tossers are derived from spoilt and rich families; arrogant tossers can also be formed due to involvement in prestigious groups and organizations e.g. rowing club, hockey club, computer club, etc. There's a fine line between pride and arrogance, but the line is crossed when they believe that in some special way, he/she is better than everyone else. The fine line is easily penetrated when individuals reach state and country levels in sporting.
Style and fashion varies among all arrogant tossers. As a general rule of thumb, arrogant tossers tend to wear clothing which affiliates with their speciality, one example are guys who wear their rugby guernsey to places which are out of character - because they're in the first team.
To determine if someone is an arrogant tosser; there are a number of key features which should stand out: they tend to walk with their head up high, chest out and with a pole up their arse. They only wear branded clothes such as Abercrombie & Fitch and they have that trademark smirk.
Dialects between arrogant tossers include bullshit jargon about absolutely shit and any topic which allows them to reaffirm that they're better than you (which they're not).
Arrogant tossers never travel alone but rather in herds.
That is actually incorrect, doctors can be held negligent . A cardiothoracic surgeon was once sued $8 million , here in Australia because he did an incorrect procedure during open heart surgery.doink said:funny how doctors can be negligent yet lawyers can't. Imagine if you could sue lawyers for defamation for everything they said in court... Wait can you?
sorry, GinoIs, have your knees been hitting the pavement too often because of us?GinoIs said:yet make sure all the fucks lower than you suck your dicks.