Bob Nogueira <nogera@prodigy.net> writes
>Your right about it being interesting and not full of legalese. This is the
>second British legal opinion that I've read that was in many ways more
>interesting than many magazine articles .
>The other one I read was
>HUBBARD vs. MIDDLEBRIDGE SCIMITAR LIMITED.
>Seems a guy contracted to buy a Bentley ( Old Number One ) and found that
>over the years every part of the car had been replaced and none of the car
>he was to buy was the original Old Number One . The seller sued for breach
>of contract when the buyer backed out . The Courts finding reads like a
>history written by Richard Langworth .
>If you'd like, I can e-mail you a copy ( 77592 bytes)
Could I have a copy?
Middlebridge Scimitar had a gloriously tangled history, buying the
rights to make the Reliant Scimitar from Reliant, spent millions of
their Japanese backers money to make the Scimitar more acceptable for a
modern car buyer, sold a few cars to discerning owners then went
spectacularly bust!
Yours, I expect is a High Court judgement, written by the Judge. The
Christine Healey judgement is from an Employment Tribunal, a lower
court, more informal, where the judgement is written by the Tribunal
Chair, always a lawyer and approved by the other two members of the
Tribunal, normally an employers representative and a trades union
representative. These are normally written as 'stories', some would be
really funny if it didn't involve real people.
--
Jeremy Edwards
1972 Morgan 4/4 2 str
Melton Mowbray, England
|