This is from Damien Grant. I was at that Cooke lecture. Grant fundamentally does not understand what the CJ meant by this. It's also bizarre to try to paint a pretty orthodox view of the common law - that it is evolutionary, that it adapts - as somehow radical or activist. - ThreadSky

dreddieclark.bsky.social • 395 days ago

This is from Damien Grant. I was at that Cooke lecture. Grant fundamentally does not understand what the CJ meant by this. It's also bizarre to try to paint a pretty orthodox view of the common law - that it is evolutionary, that it adapts - as somehow radical or activist.

Comments

jduvalsmith.bsky.social•395 days ago

Over confident ignorance is so aggravating

nug.monster•395 days ago

well if it weren't for the law he would've been able to get away with his crime.

repton.bsky.social•395 days ago

I am reminded of Ambrose Bierce:

dreddieclark.bsky.social•395 days ago

I use my Stuff column every few weeks to share ideas about stuff I generally know quite a lot about - public law nerdery basically. Wouldn't dream of writing on something I know little about, for example Grant's field of insolvency proceedings. Wish he'd have the same courtesy when he's ignorant.

jackcraw.bsky.social•395 days ago

The ignorant revel in their ignorance bc they don't know they're ignorant. Pathological liars, on the other hand, revel bc it simply serves a current purpose

willpagenz.com•395 days ago

The guy blocked me on Twitter for calling him out when he directly compared government budgeting and expenditure to household budgeting expenditure. A clueless fraud who pontificates from his high horse. Unsure why Stuff gives him a platform

sachadylan.bsky.social•395 days ago

But how would he get to hear his own voice if he adopted that principle

oldmatecans.lol•395 days ago

I am sure the CJ wilk be delighted that the right are attacking the judiciary for continuing the process of legal evolution that has been ongoing since before Captain Cook set foot on a boat.

oldmatecans.lol•395 days ago

You'd also then ask the natural question. Mr Grant, was it judicial activism and freeing from precedent for radical purposes when Justice Owen decided in 1990 that a man could rape his wife, ignoring the precedent? Or is that different because it's not about Māori?

thetasalmon.bsky.social•395 days ago

He’s a Libertarian.

By definition: arrogantly ignorant.

miravox.bsky.social•395 days ago

Thanks for reinforcing my decision to never click on articles by Damien Grant. His opinions are self-centred misinterpretations.

(Always there's an exception - his piece on prison reform was personal, informed, and beautifully written.)

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply