Legal Lessons: The Overriding Objective

Ok so I have been submerged in litigation law for the past week or so and I've just come back from my exam [which I think went ok]. Soooo being the intellectual and yet fabby person that I am, I thought I would give a little legal lesson with a twist. All civil proceedings are governed by the Civil Procedure Rules [the CPR] and the main rule that everything else branches from is called the Overriding Objective. In a nutshell the aim of the OO is to ensure that all proceedings are cost effective, expedient and fair so in effect ALL the statutory provisions of the CPR are subject to the dictates of the OO.

Get it? Got it? Good!! Now on to the fun stuff.

I have since realised that you can make metaphors out of pretty much anything and as a student of the law, I love doing this particularly with legal terminology and members of the opposite sex. Take Onion for example...

He has been avoiding our unfinished conversation like the plague and so I finally decide that enough is enough and erase him from my memory bank [not easy btw and I MAY have had a few teeny tiny vent-y type rants/explosions in the process of erm healing]. Anyhoo, I digress, the point is that the other day,  yesterday in fact, he called me and was super ready to just chit and chat as if we were slap bang in the middle of Shakespeare's 'All's well that ends well'- and what's more cheeky is that he was expecting me to comfort him because he'd had a bad day...nuh  uh..heck no. I made a hasty getaway and continued with my life when all of a sudden, Sally tells me that she...feels...sorry..for...HIM!!

SHOCK! HORROR! WTF??

It appears his voice had somehow pierced her heartstrings and for reasons inexplicable she just could not help but pity him. There was just 'something' that made her feel like he wasn't ENTIRELY trying to take me for a lumberjack...an element of sincerity?? I am not going to lie. I too have at times felt that same sincerity BUT then I glanced down at my book and remembered the Overriding Objective. Sure, sometimes I look at the statutory provisions of our relationboat and section 8[12] may say that he cared, and this may be backed up by several cases...HOWEVER the Overriding Objective says....'HE TOOK YOU FOR A LUMBERJACK' and then I look at the case of Re Valentines 2011 [and we all know the facts of this most recent commmon law] and decided that it takes precedent to all prior cases. So with that in mind, I am sticking firmly to my decision.

So you see what happened there folks?? It appears my father was right when he said to just face my books. They seem to have the answers to everything; my future career, subsequent riches and evidently my relationboat woes. How's that for lateral thinking??....