Legal Wit — Arguments Compared to "Jabberwocky". That's Bad, Right?

Legal Wit — Arguments Compared to

In his refusal to be bound by the common law, that is the authoritative interpretation of laws by judicial precedent, Mr. Bydeley presents argument which eerily resembles the language as deployed by Lewis Carroll in his famous poem, "Jabberwocky": It sounds like English, in the case of the famous poem, but it is largely comprised of invented words evincing meaning primarily to the speaker of them. The result is, that essentially Mr. Bydeley says, the law means what I say it means. In the presentation of argument thus constituted in Mr. Bydeley's case, it cannot form part of the social convention of legal argument in an institution as fundamental to constitutional democracy as a Court of Law.

19 Unfortunately for the fertile imagination of this litigant, he cannot participate in activity regulated on behalf of the community without acceding to the system we have maintained, as a democracy, for centuries of common law.

R. v. Bydeley |  (WestlawNext Canada)

2012 CarswellOnt 17276 |  (Westlaw Canada)

Ontario Court of Justice
© Copyright WestlawNext Canada, Thomson Reuters Canada Limited. All rights reserved.