...precisely because he is not required to spend most of his time sitting on it." (Lord Simmonds)
Came across this quote as I was reading McLachlin's J's judgment in Peter v Beblow. This is meant to illustrate that there is no logical reason to distinguish domestic services from other contributions. The services and contributions by a spouse in the house is not only of great value to the family, but to the other spouse.
Think it is interesting how unjust enrichment can interact with family law in constructive trust cases. But as is conceded, such a conclusion is invariably based on "value judgments" and not pure reasoning. I think this is a sound value judgment, which L Simmonds was apparently enlightened enough to make more than 40 years ago
Side Note:
I am in the library now, with Orla and Carlet, trying to prepare for my motions assessment tomorrow. Don't really know how to prepare for it since the factums are already given to us and it seems the best thing is to reproduce the whole factum, haha.
Anyways, my cold symptoms have reincarnated into runny rose and a slight cough. Boo. It must be because of the fluctuating weather. (btw the snow returned today!)
After an emotional low point yesterday and the day before cos of the booking disaster, I am feeling better and at least am in the right frame of mind. I think I'll be a free (wo)man after tomorrow, as then I would be only left with LP casework, PLT paper and 2 more MAW assignments before term ends on April 16!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment