1. Posted May 31, 2012 at 11:30 pm | Permalink

    Congratulations! 🙂

  2. Posted June 1, 2012 at 2:59 am | Permalink

    Congratulations! It’s a very handsome volume.

  3. kvd
    Posted June 1, 2012 at 3:12 am | Permalink

    Very, very well done LE!! What a fine achievement to wake up to this morning!

  4. conrad
    Posted June 1, 2012 at 5:36 am | Permalink

    Wow, a book so quickly after your PhD — you must be unstoppable! Some of those topics might be of interest to people looking at moral psychology incidentally. Off topic, I like the little Hart Publishing deer.

  5. Posted June 1, 2012 at 6:14 am | Permalink

    Hart is an old English word for ‘deer’ — hence all the pubs called ‘The White Hart’, but is also the surname of HLA Hart, arguably the greatest ever jurisprudential thinker, and former Principal of my college, Brasenose.

  6. Posted June 1, 2012 at 8:47 am | Permalink

    That is SO COOL!!!l. Congratulations, Katy. Well done.

  7. Posted June 1, 2012 at 9:21 am | Permalink

    Does the blurb mean that you have gone for “claimant” and “defendant” rather than “promisee” and “promisor”?

  8. Posted June 1, 2012 at 9:51 am | Permalink

    Marcellous, yes, I’ve gone for the English style (because it’s an English publisher). Of course, a promisee is not necessarily a claimant, which makes it complex. For that reason, there’s lots of promisees and promisors sprinkled throughout too.

  9. Patrick
    Posted June 1, 2012 at 10:24 am | Permalink

    Congratulations that’s a great effort and you must be deservedly proud!

  10. Posted June 1, 2012 at 10:42 am | Permalink

    I’ve always found the “promisee/promisor” terminology rather confusing, even though in theory there is nothing complicated about it at all. Likewise, I often see people stumble over “mortgagor/mortgagee.”

    Congrats on the book, by the way. That subtitle “Theory and Practice” suggests a certain dynamic tension, and I’ll be interested to see how you resolve it.

  11. Ripples
    Posted June 1, 2012 at 1:27 pm | Permalink


    I do like the “Hart Studies in Private Law” sounds sort of like a bit of LawNerdPorn with a sexy title like that.

  12. Posted June 1, 2012 at 2:40 pm | Permalink

    May I also suggest that the cover is a particularly fetching colour?

  13. kvd
    Posted June 1, 2012 at 2:47 pm | Permalink

    [email protected] I know exactly what you mean re ee/or. And I also get the same feeling any time I accidentally hover over SL’s gravatar – which in part says “graduated from Oxford and used to practice”.

    That should be ‘well used’ or otherwise ‘s’, I always think – but am never really sure 😉

  14. Posted June 1, 2012 at 3:01 pm | Permalink

    You’re correct – the verb form takes ‘s’. However, every time I inserted ‘s’ and saved it, the website would change it back to ‘c’. The alternative was to leave it as it was when I was living in Rocky, and I’d just spent hours figuring out how to get into the website that lets you use those ‘hovercards’. I came perilously close to putting my foot through my laptop, decided it wasn’t worth it (I would have to buy another one) and gave up.

    I have now forgotten how I got in there in the first place, so I can’t even change the image – I haven’t owned the husky in the graphic since 2006 – let alone update the words, which once they become factually wrong, will stay that way forever.

    There is a reason I hate computers and only use them under sufferance.

  15. kvd
    Posted June 1, 2012 at 3:16 pm | Permalink

    SL I do apologise. We pedants must take succour where we can, being incapable of resolving such matters as famine, war, or pestilence. But getting away from Australian politics, I do agree it is a very Royal pretty impressive pink. (Insert commas where considered appropriate – nothing physical, now) 😉

    And I’m particularly looking forward to understanding LE’s view on the treatment of profits in prospect – i.e. what is ‘lost’ by the claimant.

  16. Posted June 1, 2012 at 3:22 pm | Permalink

    I’m not sure one should call that ‘pink’. The members of a certain state’s rugby league team may object, for a start…

  17. Posted June 1, 2012 at 3:24 pm | Permalink

    Congratulations LE, publishing a book is a great achievement! (And here I was feeling accomplished for just getting my assignment in on time 😉 I think I’ll be covering contract remedies next semester, so maybe I’ll be able find a good reason to cite you as an authority.

  18. kvd
    Posted June 1, 2012 at 4:01 pm | Permalink

    [email protected] I call it pink because, as a Mexican, I cannot decide between ‘maar-oon’ or ‘maar-own’. Which matters not, because they are bound to lose to maintain the tv ratings for the third match.

    Whatever. It certainly has Ripples umm.. rippling.

    LE – what premium for a personal hand-written dedication? I’d be pleased to pay for something a little more up-market than “Piss off you idiot”. Even something like “We use the same alphabet, but thereafter part company” would suffice 😉

  19. Posted June 1, 2012 at 5:00 pm | Permalink

    I have to say the colour would make it stand out amongst my current collection of law books which is 60% black and 40% white. At least my engineering books managed to have a few blues and greens.

    Which matters not, because they are bound to lose to maintain the tv ratings for the third match.

    Given the mexicans have lost the last 6 series, you can’t blame the fact they keep getting maar-owned on some ratings conspiracy. I mean even wikipedia can tell we’re going to win again and has already coloured in this year’s result.

  20. Posted June 1, 2012 at 5:30 pm | Permalink

    I once accidentally interchanged the names of the chargee and chargor. On OVER ONE HUNDRED ASIC CHARGE FORMS. Erm.

    I think I can beat that: forgetting to compound the interest when calculating quantum in a multi-party claim.

    And I’m sure you all know how, in mathematics — when you make a mistake early on in a calculation — it just gets shittier and shittier all the way down the line…

  21. kvd
    Posted June 1, 2012 at 5:41 pm | Permalink

    when you make a mistake early on in a calculation — it just gets shittier and shittier all the way down the line…

    Life. You’re standing in it.

  22. Posted June 3, 2012 at 8:20 am | Permalink

    The last time I saw SL she was about to go to Oxford and had just put her foot through a laptop. I saw her going into a computer shop in James Street.

    BTW, will be in Melbourne later in the year LE. Will expect coffee so I can get my copy of your heretical text signed.

  23. Posted June 3, 2012 at 8:24 am | Permalink

    Just interested to know whether you think there is a role for legislative reform to allow for an account of profits for breach of contract?

  24. Nick Ferrett
    Posted June 3, 2012 at 8:35 pm | Permalink

    I think it would be a good reform. I just don’t think you can get there from the cases. Perhaps I’ll be persuaded otherwise by your book?!

  25. Mel
    Posted June 5, 2012 at 11:03 am | Permalink

    Good on you, LE. I hope your book becomes a legal classic!

  26. kvd
    Posted June 11, 2012 at 3:55 pm | Permalink

    “Hart Studies in Privale Law”

    Wikipedia saysthat private law is to be “distinguished from public law, which deals with relationships between both natural and artificial persons”.

    This has been niggling away at me, and I’m hoping both you and Hart have exceeded the brief.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *