I appreciate that it’s traditional to have a Christmas punch-up on either ODG or RDG, though I think Jason is being a bit blatant in starting this one.

 

“Denning was a menace” – Some think so – others think he was a welcome antidote to the stuffiness that pervaded the English courts in his time. Of course, stating it in such vague and emotive terms makes it very hard to have a rational debate about it. If Jason wants to come out with a more precise and meaningful statement, we can see what we think about it.

 

“He did not judge in good faith” – this would be a serious accusation indeed, if it meant anything. I suspect however that Jason has some jurisprudential point in mind, rather than anything which most people would call an issue of good or bad faith. We just have to accept that we differ on many fundamental points. I am several light-years away from Jason’s assumptions about law, but wouldn’t dream of saying that this made his utterances “bad faith”. What on earth can Jason has in mind, that such strong language is called for?  

 

“…and is therefore corrosive of the rule of law”. Denning’s general judicial style was simply a throw-back to the typical style of a century earlier, made more effective by the fact that he was a good prose stylist as well as an able lawyer. If that is “corrosive of the rule of law”, then presumably the rule of law had already been thoroughly corroded in the late 19^th century.  Or does Jason have something more specific in mind?   

 

“As Robert noted in his inargural most of Denning's damage to the law of contract has largely been undone thankfully.” I’ve not seen Robert’s inaugural yet.  If this refers to Denning’s attempt to increase protection for consumers, I would say that the problem of the old law was the failure to distinguish sufficiently between consumer and business transactions – a battle which Denning won, though the result is now expressed in statute rather than in case law.  But what is the issue?

 

 

Steve Hedley

UCC

 

 

 

And that's why Denning was a menace. He did not judge in good faith and is therefore corrosive of the rule of law. As Robert noted in his inargural most of Denning's damage to the law of contract has largely been undone thankfully.