[blml] Ignorantia juris non excusat [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Wayne Burrows]

On 25/07/07, Jerry Fusselman <jfusselman at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/24/07, Wayne Burrows <wjburrows at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I wouldn't dream that 'understanding' encompasses both 'agreement' and
> > 'experience' from anything written in the laws.
> >
>
> That 'understanding' is the big category should be clear from Law 40D,
> and probably other places as well.  That it encompasses both
> 'agreement' and 'experience' is especially clear in Law 75C.
>

Wow!!!  You are reading something in L40D that I cannot see.  There is
nothing there that suggests 'understanding' encompasses 'experience'.
In so much as 'understanding' is synonymous with 'agreement' I can see
how that is included.

My experience includes that fact that partner is a lunatic and bids on
all sorts of hands that I wouldn't.  I'd be pleased if the SO could
regulate against this but I don't really think that is possible.

And similarly in L75C there is nothing stating that 'partnership
agreement and partnership experience' make up the whole 'partnership
understanding'.  If in fact they did why wouldn't the lawmaker just
write the simpler 'partnership understanding'.  And as stated above
'experience' just can't be part of 'understanding' since
'understanding' is able to be regulated but clearly it would be
nonsense to regulate 'experience'.

Wayne