Criminal Law - Class at LHH

Well, its time for some fun post after the much sweet posts dedicated to my special someone. =)

We had criminal law class today and I bet it has to be one of the most funniest, exciting, hilarious, fun-filled and interesting classes yet. We were doing a tutorial question on Sexual Offences. Now, sexual offences is governed by the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (SOA 2003). This act clearly states the conditions in where an individual can be liable for sexual acts that he carries out on another individual.

As we were going through the question, it came to a point where the class was so hyped-out because the case given was rather stimulating I would say. It was regarding a guy who was deeply involved in a cult, which strongly believes that women always want sex and its the duty of its members to provide such satisfaction.

Discussion was rather slow and quiet at the beginning until a rather simple question was raised and the fun just started. One of my classmate was commenting on the fact that it wasn't stated in the case whether penetration occured (ie: penetration is required to prove an offence under the Sexual Offences Act - depending on the section).

My lecturer then said that he had to agree and it also wasn't really sure if the individual mentioned in the case was a HE or a SHE, or rather a HE-SHE. So, it is fair to say that we cant really prove that penetration had occured. However, he did say that we should always take it as face value, knowing the fact that the act itself, accademically does not accept the situation whereby a man can be raped.

From nowehere, the same classmate made this very interesting and hillarious statement:

Classmate: If that person is a he-she, that person should be called an IT and not HE or SHE. Its an IT.

Hahahahahahahahaha!!!! *seriously hope you guys get the joke*

That's all for now...

CK

Marriage as defined by "Contract Law"

Me and my friend, Xiaoheng has this plan of really writting a 'book'. We do hope it can become a reality. We are trying to define a r.ship between a guy and a gal; ie: mostly based on marriage using the terms in Contract Law.

Please leave a comment if anyone has better suggestions k?? These are just preliminary and we are looking into furnishing it further.

Offer*
- when a guy makes a proposal towards to gal.
- takes place when the guy 'pops' the 'question', ie: either for marriage or to begin a relationship.

Acceptance*
- when the gal accepts the proposal and says 'yes' or in certain cases, does not literally mention 'yes' but shows her interest or acceptance in a mutually understood method.
- accepts the ring, which is given by the guy

Consideration*
- Consideration is a reason for enforcing the marriage. It happens when a girl agrees to a guy that she will marry him. The guy in return gives the girl a ring as a form of consideration.
Another example of consideration is when the parents of the girl agrees to the guy that he could marry their daughter.
- Consideration must be sufficient but need not be adequate. Under this heading, dowries given by the guy's family to the girl's family need not be high in value, a small value item would be deem by the court as sufficient to amount as the dowry for the marriage.
- Consideration must move from the parties. Each party must act on their promise and do their equal part of bargaining in the contract.

Misrepresentation*
- applies to both the guy and gal
- Gal: when she misrepresents her current status, ie: is engaged in another relationship but nevertheless starts another.
- Gal: when she misrepresents her condition, ie: been engaged in conducts that may not be acceptable by the guy, but fraudulently misrepresented it.
- Guy: when he misrepresents his current status, ie: is engaged in another relationship but nevertheless starts another.
- Only fraudulent misrepresentation will be accounted for; negligent misrepresentation is NOT applicable

Rescission*
- Can only take place under the few circumstances below:
a) If restitution is possible
b) Within a reasonable time frame

Intention to create legal relation*
This is divided into two types:
1) Social/Business Relations
- Whenever a social/business marriage contract is made, it is always presumed that both parties had not intended to be engaged in a legal relation. This is based on the main presumption that an individual engaging in such a contract is normally forced to (business purposes) or has negative intentions towards the other individual (riches and property).

2) Domestic/Internal Relations
- Whenever a domestic/internal marriage contract is made, it is always presume that both parties had intended to be engaged in a legal relation. This is based on the main presumption that if the agreement was made internally, ie: within the both parties; both parties had consented and voluntarily intended to be engaged in a legal relation.

Vitiating Factors
- Such a contract as the above shall be void if any vitiating factors take place.
- Vitiating factors are:
1) If either immediate family members of an individual in the relationship does not agree with the relationship.
2) If either individual had fraudulently misrepresented his/her status and/or conducts.

OTHERS:
Intellectual Property
1) Object of Lust (Curry v. Misai) per defined by Lust LJ.
- An entity that results in an individual being excited and happy
"Excited" shall be described as, extremely aggitated about the entity and constitutes in the individual changin his/her moods.

* Shall be updated and furnished in upcoming posts.
* Do leave your comments so that we can improve.

PS: This is just for joke purposes. It has no connection with any individual who is dead or alive.
- This 'contract' is designed to ensure that both parties in a relationship are truthful to one another and will live happily ever after together.

CK