duty to assist...

The last 2 days have been nothing but sheer misery. First up was the dreaded case law assignment which I struggled with, I am still undecided whether I hate the judge for writing such long and lengthy judgments or the fact that our lectures make us go through such uninteresting and boring cases . Oh the lesser of 2 evils! Broughton is basically about some idiot, who went into hungry jacks and sought help from the security guard, but the guard refused to assist and threw the plaintiff out and now the plaintiff is suing the owner of premise and security guard for negligence. Logically speaking, I agree with the judges that the defendant do not owe the plaintiff any duty to assist simply because according to Hart’s theory, he explains that law and morality are not interchangeable terms. A rule of law may be morally iniquitous, but it is still law; one may not impugn its validity solely on the ground of its lack of morality. Secondly is that if the judge were to change a rule of law according to ‘community values’, he will therefore be opening a legal floodgate of other claims ranging from earliest possible date. I do not therefore think it’s wise for the learned judge to change the rule. But who am I to say? I am only a first year law student struggling through law school, who still can’t tell the difference between ratio and obiter dicta. The accounting quiz also did not help to bring me out of my misery. This is the first time in my life where I find MCQs hard. Screw it. Is hungry jacks looking to hire? Oh yea, nat and ying got baptized last Sunday, wohoo love you guys to bits….