Fusion fallacy - Oxford Reference
Free Essays on Fusion Fallacy through - Essay Depot
if u're looking for a couple of really good articles that canvas most of the issues nicely (and avoid u having to go too deep into it all) there's the tilbury one u've already got, the burrows one i mentioned in my post (u'll find it through mac journal finder) as well as 'the fusion fallacy revisited' fiona burns bond law review, plus there's a 'suggested answer' to a fusion question in 'the nature of equity and the law of trusts' u'll find if u google it which summarises the issues quite nicely (though is more focussed on english law than australian). if u need to get 2500 words out under the gun u can borrow my original structure if u like - it looked at pre-judicature law and equity (brief thing on evolution and rationales), then the judicature act, the fusion fallacy and i elaborated from there. it's not a bad structure for eating up words - i ended up chucking it in favour of direct/indirect fusion and trying to incorporate (by implication) some of those things (not sure how they'll feel about that) cause i needed the extra words, but if i needed to get that many words out in two days i'd probably have used it (far less finicky than pedantic case analysis, dissection of the ff theory so i can support it while crapping on it etc). just some thoughts.
"The 'Fusion Fallacy' Revisited" by Fiona Burns
I believe that the High Court is behaving in a way that is also activist, just in the opposite direction. It opposes extension to the law blindly. Rather than making a principled response, it exhibits blind prejudice against anything featuring the word “restitution” or anything that suggests that equity and common law might have some kind of synergy. I don’t really care a fig about restitution or fusion fallacy. What I do care about is justice for litigants, and if there is a suggestion that an unjust result can be avoided by expanding principle, then I think the expansion needs to be carefully considered.