Merged Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Argument Litigants

[JLord]

Because the judge's contention is that the "gurus" of the individual sovereignty movements invariably sell their services to the unsuspecting masses, hence it is a commercial endeavor and not the high-minded social reform it is styled as.

That was how I understood the term. These organized psudolegal arguments are commercial in nature because they come from outside commercial sources. Rarely do they come from the person's own ideas or research. They are typically pre-prepared documents sold or given out by someone who is in it for their own gain. This was my undrestanding of the term commercial.

 

[FMOTLgroupie]

OK, I re-read it and paragraphs 4 and 73 are pretty clear that the judge uses "commercial" to refer to the commercial distribution of the arguments, not the internal logic of the arguments. Good to know.

 

[Mojo]

http://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2012/0...udolegal-nonsense-canadian-judge-fights-back/

I've just noticed that one of the comments there has found a new piece of legal terminology to misunderstand:

Statutes that usurp the Law of the Land
•English common law rights of the people of England
Laws are liable to be struck out in their entirety, due to ‘MISCHIEF RULE
•To decide whether an act of parliament is lawful judges must consider:
•1. ‘What was the common law before the making of the Act?’
•2. ‘What was the mischief and defect for which the common law did not provide?’
•3. ‘What remedy the Parliament hath resolved and appointed to cure the disease of the commonwealth?’ And,
•4. ‘The true reason of the remedy’

The mischief rule is actually a rule used in the interpretation of legislation. It is used to figure out what a statute means, not to have it "struck out".