05 Feb 2010
I have a sneaky regard for Mr Justice Tugendhat. Not least because I once stayed in his villa in France.
The esteemed Tugendaht, you may recall, last week revoked an injunction granted to England football captain, John Terry, blocking newspapers reporting his alleged affair with an England team mate’s Mrs. Waving the flag for free speech, Tugendhat decided it was in the public’s interest to know every vulgar detail about the loathsome Terry’s off pitch dalliances.
And to be honest, the sooner this lying, cheating, despicable oaf is ousted from his position as captain, so much the better. (There, I said it.)
But I do hate how legal types insist on making everything totally incomprehensible.
Take this, as reported in this week’s Private Eye.
“Notice has not been given to any newspaper when it should have been, and, as a result, I have not had the benefit of arguments in opposition to the application, which might have assisted me to be satisfied of the matters of which I am not satisfied.”
Now, when you read this about 15 times you eventually get the gist. But isn’t it about time the legal profession made a concerted effort to stop speaking in ‘legalese’?