Wednesday, September 17, 2008

Be Sure Brain Is In Gear Before Engaging Mouth


When I was the SAR for High Court Commercial Division 6 last year, I had the notice up above placed behind me on my cupboard. Anytime a counsel tried to argue against something totally irrational and merepek like:

“The bank could have gone for those with bigger debts than to chase my client”

“My client wanted to pay but the bank did not grant further time extension”

“My client has paid his debt about 2% out of the total sum. This is enough for bank not to initiate legal proceeding!”

C’mon Man!!!
Counsels should refrain from even suggesting this kind of arguments. Especially in High Court! What do you expect me to write as my LEGAL reasoning for dismissing the bank’s claim?

“The bank ought not to have filed this suit because the bank should have gone after those with bigger debts.”

“The bank should have granted more time before they could sue the defendant.”
(and this is after a few years the defendant defaulted!)

“2% payment is enough not to be sued by a bank for default cases.”

Thankfully, the moment I point my pen to the notice behind me, they would stop and move on to the next issue.

Blog adjourned!

Reactions:

0 obiter dictum: