Restitution Discussion Group Archives
| Sender: |
Allan Axelrod |
| Date: |
Tue, 2 Dec 1997 09:58:35 -0500 |
| Re: |
Taylor v. Dickens |
On Mon, 1 Dec 1997,
Colin Riegels wrote:
.......... To the suggestion that there was a general
right of equitable intervention in response to any unconscionability
he asserted: "[i]f there were such a jurisdiction one might as well
forget the law of contract and judge every civil dispute with a portable
palm tree." Words to remember indeed. in US law under the Uniform commercial Code, 'unconscionability'
is in issue for almost every commercial contract in the US and would you
believe life goes on, and case outcomes are not generally thought to be
capricious
what pathology accounts for this sort of 'end-of-western-civilization-as-we-know-it'
judicial statement?
<== Previous message Back to index Next message ==>
»
»
»
»
| For
editorial policy, see here. For the unedited archive, see here. The archive editor is Steve Hedley. |
