Billygean.co.uk

Tuesday, May 08, 2007

Bad day

So a distinction usually stands me in good stead for the rest of the day, mood wise. You may want to read in here that this implies I am anal and seek to validate my personality with essay marks. But we won't go here.

The day got steadily worse with the Equity Paper From Hell. Warning: do not attempt to sit past exams papers for your worst module. Ignorance is by far a better option.

Do not forget to get off the train at Tamworth.

Do not use your last Lush bathbomb only to discover it's full of honey, which, while delighting me!, also saddened me because it meant body and hair were covered in oil instead of being clean.

A bad move in response to this would be to drain the bathwater and have a shower.

This is because there was a spider hiding on the shower head.

I used the c-word.

Another bad move would be to bravely continue showering, slip and fall in the oil.

One last thing: never email your tutors about consideration and land registration. You will get the scariest replies EVER:

-------------------------

Dear Billygean

If one of the “triggers to registration” takes place, under s4 LRA 2002 (basically, if the land is sold, handed over as a gift, granted by court order or a lease of more than 7 years is created out of it) OR if the land is voluntarily registered then first registration rules apply.
If the land is unregistered, there is no voluntary registration and none of the triggers to first registration takes place during the problem question, then the rules governing unregistered land will apply (the most common example here is where a lease of less than seven years is created out of unregistered land).

Best wishes

Smouldering Tutor

-------------------------

Dear Billygean

It is true that mutual promises provide consideration for each other. This is the basis of the notion of the executory contract (i.e. a contract which has been made but not yet performed). It is much harder to explain why this is the case, although it is well established that it is. The problem with saying that executory promises are good consideration is that the argument appears to be circular. They are only good consideration if they make the other side’s promise binding – but that is what we are trying to prove. It is the case that the executory promises are only good consideration if the act or forebearance promised would itself be a good consideration when performed, so I suppose that you could say that the promise has to be “something of value”, but this is also a victim of the circularity argument which I mentioned above.

Yours confusedly

Contract Lecturer

-------------------------

Thanks for this.

Smouldering Tutor, I don't care how hot you are, land registration will never make sense.

Labels: law

by billygean.co.uk at 11:21 PM |