The 'Fusion Fallacy' Revisited - ePublications@bond

Law in Australia has two distinct jurisdictions: equity and common law. Equity and Trust is exclusive to the jurisdiction of equity, a body of law derived in England and exercised before 1873. Equity corrects and supplements the common law by providing remedies where they were either inadequate or non-existent. Common law is ‘the unwritten law derived from the established law of England, having been developed by judicial precedence, interpretation, expansion and modification’. The Judicature Act (Imp) 1873 (the Act), saw the administration of equity and the common law merged, however, many have interpreted the Act more broadly and argue the two streams, described by Tilbury fused to become one system of law, leaving those with the opposing view to argue fusion fallacy. The aim, therefore, of this essay is to usurp an opinion for or against fusion fallacy as per Mason P statement in Harris v Digital Pulse, using case law and academic writings. The opinion will be demonstrated, using the doctrines of estoppel, fiduciary obligation, and equitable remedies.

Fusion fallacy - Oxford Reference

... So thats a very basic breakdown of the Fusion Fallacy. Thrilling, huh?

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.

i wanna go somewhere where the only fusion fallacy is whether rum should mix with coke.
Free Essays on Fusion Fallacy. Get help with your writing. 1 through 30

Walsh v Lonsdale: The Non-Fusion Fallacy - JSTOR

i've decided to insert a nice historical section in the beginning of mine - i.e. prejudicature law and equity - though it's a bit concerning given that it's highly descriptive (it looks at how the common law originated, how equity originated, what roles they were designed to play). they've got over that whole 'refer to ur argument every paragraph' thing by now haven't they? i'm then going to go into the judicature act, say what it does, then talk about direct fusion (which is a load of crap) before i go into the 'fusion fallacy.' it flows nicely, but might be a bit descriptive (not sure if they just want a bunch of arguments rather than background to set up the case). what do u guys reckon?

1 the ‘fusion fallacy’ between equity and common law: a critical analysis

fusion fallacy at 11:36 AM 4 comments: Tuesday, January 30, 2007

Arguably the greatest legacy of Meagher, Gummow and Lehane, certainly its most renowned feature, is its exposition of the ‘fusion fallacy’, which seeks to define the relationship between law and equity in a judicature world (that is, in a common law system in which, emulating the Judicature Act 1873 (UK), law and equity are...

(1997), Beyond Fusion Fallacy: The Transformation of Equity and Derrida's ‘The Force of Law’

The 'Fusion Fallacy' Revisited - ePublications@bond

... So thats a very basic breakdown of the Fusion Fallacy. Thrilling, huh? i can see Cyan Pheonix upon reading that thinking "yes its march 29th......i can still drop the law subjects"