Reviews for Extradition in International Law - Ivan A. Shearer - Hardcover

The average rating for Extradition in International Law - Ivan A. Shearer - Hardcover based on 2 reviews is 4.5 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2015-05-29 00:00:00 Elizabeth Boyle I cannot understand why A.P. Herbert is not more famous than he is, for this book is a fascinating, funny and thought-provoking collection of fake legal cases and until I stumbled across Herbert's name in Wikipedia while looking for something else, I had never heard of him. He really ought to rank up next to P.G. Wodehouse et al as being one of the top humorists of that time and place. Uncommon Law showcases much of the stupidity and silliness inherent in British law at that time. Cases are included illustrating the sheer ludicrousness of, for example, the following things: 1. There was, at the time, no such thing as a no-fault divorce. (This has, thank goodness, been corrected.) To get a divorce you had to accuse your partner of something like cruelty, adultery, etc. In a lot of cases couples who wanted to split up would stage an adultery, having the husband conspicuously check into a hotel for the night with a "mistress" hired for the occasion, just so they could get out of the marriage. 2. BUT if it was proven that both husband AND wife had misconducted themselves (committed adultery, for example), then the marriage had to stand. 3. The difference between a felony and a misdemeanor is a very significant one for the criminal record (a felony being considered a more serious crime and having much more severe consequences than a misdemeanor), but it is also completely meaningless. It had grown impossible to tell whether a particular offense was a felony, or a misdemeanor. 4. The government put a tax on lectures and performances, except when they were educational. However, they didn't recognize that such events could be both entertaining and educational, and tried to tax those, so in effect a lecture or play had to be boring to claim the tax exemption. Herbert appears to be somewhat of a libertarian. Quoting from the book: "I understand that in the opinion of all Government Departments all fun is prima facie illegal, and, if it is not illegal, deserves to be taxed." This book was written in the latter half of the twentieth century, but many of the legal issues therein are still highly relevant today. For instance, "Rex vs. Bloggs, What is Education?" is an excellent defense of homeschooling. And several of the cases deal with the issue of the police enticing people to commit violations, then arresting them for it. (To this day, do the police not send in underage teenagers to try to buy cigarettes?) Lawyers in particular would love this book, but I would recommend it for any intelligent person who likes humor that will make them think as well as laugh.

Review # 2 was written on 2020-09-02 00:00:00 Joel Rude Well, that was fun. I first heard about this out-of-print book through a rec on my chat list. 66 close parodies of English law-case reports -- so close is the satire, in some cases, that they were sometimes subsequently mistaken for the real thing. Most of them apparently appeared as short humorous articles in Punch in the 1920s and 1930s -- social, legal, and technological issues and attitudes of the day are both consciously and unconsciously showcased. It is interesting, for example, to see the comments and side-comments as that society struggles to come to grips with this new technology of the motor-car, when the new rules of the road were just being worked out -- as usual for law, the hard way. The "negotiable cow" may be the most famous of these "66 Misleading Cases" (that subtitle itself is a send-up of a real law tome titled Leading Cases), but I was also quite fond of the argument about right-of-way on a flooded road between a motor-car and a rowboat -- one of which is required to keep to its left, the other to its right, by their respective codes. Mr Albert Haddock is well on his way to becoming a small hero of mine, as well as a day-brightener to some of the bewigged and beleaguered judges before whom he repeatedly brings his conundrums. There is a huge amount I don't know about the intricacies of British law -- not to mention American law -- but for brief faux-dry writings, a deal of illuminating characterization, and on-going accumulating characterization as certain names appeared repeatedly, also comes through. Very good bedtime reading, due to the short episodic structure and mostly unharrowing content. Recommended. Ta, L.