Being sued over a car I sold :(
Discussion
superlightr said:
Breadvan72 said:
Actus Reus said:
BV doesn't even have a proper law degree.
Just throwing that out there.
There is no such thing as a proper law degree. Law is not a fit subject for scholarship. All academic law schools should be set on fire. Just throwing that out there.
there is a bit of snobbery about if you go to a uni to study for a law degree and then onto law school for the 1 year (which was the traditional route) or go to a uni doing a different subject like English or Pottery or whatever and then do a conversion course in Law and then go to law school
matters not to me - I did it the right way........ 
Edited by superlightr on Friday 11th December 17:51
Apart from our learned friends, does anyone else have the same opinion as me on why law and medicine hold onto Latin?
Language has this habit of evolving and meaning of words changes over time. "Gay" could be a good example compared to even 30-40 years ago, but "wicked" and "sick" probably need a bit longer to fully evolve.
Latin is effectively a dead language and words still mean the same as they did a thousand years ago, so using Latin minimises the risk of confusion or error around the use/meaning of a word/phrase/term.
Language has this habit of evolving and meaning of words changes over time. "Gay" could be a good example compared to even 30-40 years ago, but "wicked" and "sick" probably need a bit longer to fully evolve.
Latin is effectively a dead language and words still mean the same as they did a thousand years ago, so using Latin minimises the risk of confusion or error around the use/meaning of a word/phrase/term.
It is interesting that it seems 'optional' to have a Law degree; yet when lawyers want an expert they insist on qualifications.
I've a doctorate which seems to be a label they find attractive/useful and I've been asked numerous times to be an 'expert witness' but I've always refused, despite the hefty fees. Why go into a situation where at least one party is trying to make you appear an idiot?
Better to be quiet and be thought an idiot than open your mouth and prove it.
I've a doctorate which seems to be a label they find attractive/useful and I've been asked numerous times to be an 'expert witness' but I've always refused, despite the hefty fees. Why go into a situation where at least one party is trying to make you appear an idiot?
Better to be quiet and be thought an idiot than open your mouth and prove it.
drdel said:
It is interesting that it seems 'optional' to have a Law degree; yet when lawyers want an expert they insist on qualifications.
I've a doctorate which seems to be a label they find attractive/useful and I've been asked numerous times to be an 'expert witness' but I've always refused, despite the hefty fees. Why go into a situation where at least one party is trying to make you appear an idiot?
Better to be quiet and be thought an idiot than open your mouth and prove it.
Law isn't much of an academic subject, to be honest. The best lawyers (by a mile) are in practice, rather than (or as well as) writing books or teaching hungover young adults. I've a doctorate which seems to be a label they find attractive/useful and I've been asked numerous times to be an 'expert witness' but I've always refused, despite the hefty fees. Why go into a situation where at least one party is trying to make you appear an idiot?
Better to be quiet and be thought an idiot than open your mouth and prove it.
Lawyers rate each other by experience more than qualifications. As for candidate lawyers, it's brain power that matters, more than whether they have exercised that brain power on law. A first in a proper subject impresses me more than a first in law.
I know fantastic lawyers that are also fantastic legal academics. I also know fantastic lawyers who didn't do a law degree and have zero interest in law for its own sake (rather than as part of the job).
ORD said:
drdel said:
It is interesting that it seems 'optional' to have a Law degree; yet when lawyers want an expert they insist on qualifications.
I've a doctorate which seems to be a label they find attractive/useful and I've been asked numerous times to be an 'expert witness' but I've always refused, despite the hefty fees. Why go into a situation where at least one party is trying to make you appear an idiot?
Better to be quiet and be thought an idiot than open your mouth and prove it.
Law isn't much of an academic subject, to be honest. The best lawyers (by a mile) are in practice, rather than (or as well as) writing books or teaching hungover young adults. I've a doctorate which seems to be a label they find attractive/useful and I've been asked numerous times to be an 'expert witness' but I've always refused, despite the hefty fees. Why go into a situation where at least one party is trying to make you appear an idiot?
Better to be quiet and be thought an idiot than open your mouth and prove it.
Lawyers rate each other by experience more than qualifications. As for candidate lawyers, it's brain power that matters, more than whether they have exercised that brain power on law. A first in a proper subject impresses me more than a first in law.
I know fantastic lawyers that are also fantastic legal academics. I also know fantastic lawyers who didn't do a law degree and have zero interest in law for its own sake (rather than as part of the job).
This Lawer / Barrister thingy, without a law degree, but a degree in Photoshop, how??
tumble dryer said:
Excuse my ignorance. I'm sure it can't just be me.
This Lawer / Barrister thingy, without a law degree, but a degree in Photoshop, how??
You can 'convert' by doing a 1 or 2 year course in which you just learn law. Most of the law bits of a law degree with none of the scenic route stuff and fancy intellectualising of what is just a system of rules. This Lawer / Barrister thingy, without a law degree, but a degree in Photoshop, how??
You wouldn't get onto a course with a crappy first degree, though. It would need to be in a proper subject and from a proper university, I think.
You then train in the relevant profession - solicitor or barrister (both of which are lawyers). There is a taught stage to that (one year) and then an apprenticeship stage (one or two years).
ORD said:
tumble dryer said:
Excuse my ignorance. I'm sure it can't just be me.
This Lawer / Barrister thingy, without a law degree, but a degree in Photoshop, how??
You can 'convert' by doing a 1 or 2 year course in which you just learn law. Most of the law bits of a law degree with none of the scenic route stuff and fancy intellectualising of what is just a system of rules. This Lawer / Barrister thingy, without a law degree, but a degree in Photoshop, how??
You wouldn't get onto a course with a crappy first degree, though. It would need to be in a proper subject and from a proper university, I think.
You then train in the relevant profession - solicitor or barrister (both of which are lawyers). There is a taught stage to that (one year) and then an apprenticeship stage (one or two years).
I suppose the reality is that beyond the formal, fairly massive input of 'law' data sufficient to pass into the profession, it's like everything else...
Good tradesmen/women who take a pride in their work and are, to a given extent, ambitious, as a result of which are generally sucessful, and those who aren't.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff