In an article written in 1905 but published for the first time in the most recent New Yorker, Mark Twain (left) exercises the privilege of the grave: that of the expression that is really free. In his view, although we may in theory have the right to free speech, nevertheless, in practice, prudence and social convention prevent us from exercising it, so that the only time we can really exercise it is from the grave, whence we don’t care what others might think of the views which we might express. Read the rest of this entry »

It is an interesting phenomenon to observe a person’s name becoming a generic description. Take, for example, Shylock, who features in an earlier post on this blog. The name, with a lower-case initial, is defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as “an extortionate usurer … an abusive term for a moneylender”. Another – perhaps even more famous, and certainly seasonal – example is provided by Scrooge, the anti-hero in A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens. Of this name, the OED says that it is used “to designate a miserly, tight-fisted person or killjoy” (here’s an example from yesterday’s Irish Times).

This is all by way of introducing a post by Keith Rowley on ContractsProf Blog entitled Ebenezer Scrooge on Contract Formation. He sets out a conversation from the screenplay of a movie version of the story which does not seem to appear in the book. This is neither the first nor the only time that screenplays have taken liberties with this book, my favourite movie version certainly does. In this case, the conversation is added to illustrate Scrooge’s heartlessness at the beginning of the story (before his conversion to the spirt of Christmas at the end of the book). However, as Rowley puts it, the conversation also rather neatly illustrates “the then-prevailing common law rule that an offer made in a face-to-face conversation expires at the end of the conversation unless the offeror indicates otherwise”. Read all about it here.

Be careful what you wish for. Many of us hope to win the national lottery; but for the members of a Mayo lotto syndicate, winning the €1,577,578 jackpot on 6 January 2001 did not bring the kind of positive changes they would have wished for. Four members collected the winnings; but a fifth man claimed that, although he was in arrears, he was still a member of the syndicate and thus entitled to a one-fifth share of the winnings. The matter was not resolved amicably, and it went to court. Read the rest of this entry »

I learn from this week’s New Yorker (cover, left) that the Cardozo School of Law of New York’s Yeshiva University that Shylock was finally able to appeal the judgment rendered against him in Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice (advance notice | poster (pdf) | YU news story | photos).

A Jewish moneylender in Renaissance Venice, Shylock had made a loan to Antonio, in default of which he would entitled to a pound of Antonio’s flesh. Antonio defaulted, and Shylock sought specific performance. But, after Portia’s advocacy on behalf of Antonio, the Duke of Venice ruled that Shylock was entitled to a pound of flesh but not a drop of blood, and refused both specific performance and damages in lieu. More than that, for seeking to take Antonio’s life, Shylock was disgraced and forced to convert to Christianity, and his property was forfeit (though half was ultimately settled upon his daughter Jessica, who had converted to Christianity and eloped with her suitor, Lorenzo). Read the rest of this entry »

Regular readers of this blog will know that section 20(4) of the Broadcasting Authority Act, 1960 (also here) and section 10(3) of the Radio and Television Act, 1988 (also here) as amended by section 65 of the Broadcasting Act, 2001 (also here) prohibit broadcast advertising in Ireland directed to any religious or political end (see here | here | here | here | here | here).

Edit: The remainder of this long post discusses the validity of such bans in the US, the ECHR, Ireland and the UK, by way of background three recent developments: debate about a failure to take a current legislative opportunity to amend the Irish legislation, another ban on an Irish religious advertisement, and an ECHR decision striking down a political advertising ban. Read the rest of this entry »