Hi there! Welcome to bounces and buckets.
Bounces — my $0.02 on what is happening in my brain. Sometimes up, sometimes down.
Buckets — my $0.02 on a legal concept. Hopefully swishing through with nothing but net.
I came across an article saying that Lebron James gets 8 to 10 hours sleep a night. Wowsers. I wish. But maybe there’s something to it. After a bit of a rowdy Saturday, and then a Sunday when I didn’t want my weekend to finish so I stayed up late, those two nights of little sleep put me in a murderous mood yesterday (combined with Mondayitis). But a better rest last night and I’m ready to go today. Maybe not sleeping enough is what’s been holding back my NBA career… Self-care though is something to aim for and easy to forget.
That’s the bounce.
Here’s the bucket: if you’ve got a case involving a contract, and it just doesn’t make sense, what’s the legal position? Obviously many cases on this, but one goodie is some fellow called Dixon CJ said in Fitzgerald v Masters(1956) 95 CLR 420 at 426–427: “Words may generally be supplied, omitted or corrected, in an instrument, where it is clearly necessary in order to avoid absurdity or inconsistency.” That is, if something has gone horribly wrong in the drafting, the court can (at least sometimes) fix it up. Obviously it’s not often that a contract can be characterised in this way, but if so, that snippet might be where the answer lies.
Ok that’s it for now – check back soon!