ROFLMAO.

I know troisnyx* officiel has been kinda wordy this time, but well. These days my stories only contain words - it's just improper for me to be taking pictures in the classroom when everyone's gearing up for exams.

So. Today was a veeeeeeerrrryyyyyyyyyy loooooooooooooonnnggggg day.

I had Literature class from 10 to 1. And today we were re-revising Julius Caesar. Ms Sunbeam interrogated us about yesterday's exam - and found that not many people answered the question on The Mill on the Floss which I answered (the one on artificial social rules) - and later, we headed out for lunch at Sentral Chappati House because it was Kimberly's birthday and she was dying for chappati.

But this wasn't the funny part.

The funny part was when we were in Mr Raja Singham's class for law. Today's law class was divided into two sections - Civil Justice System with Ms Donna and Sources of Law with Mr Raja Singham. And the entire thing lasted from 2:30 to 7:30. Well, almost all these jokes are law-based, so I'll be providing some explanations in between.

First funny thing :
In this chapter called Statutory Interpretation, there're several rules of interpretation. One is the literal rule (the US calls it the "plain meaning rule"), where you interpret a statute (piece of law) in its literal meaning even if the result is absurd. Another is the golden rule - created to remove absurdity in the literal rule. The rest of the rules, I guess they aren't really necessary to explain here...

So. On the notes Mr Raja Singham tried to point out to the students that we can argue on a certain fact.... and he put in the words "You can argue..." . Now. He warned us not to make the SAME mistake the people have been doing for several years - they put in the exam paper, "You can argue......" instead of changing the words ! They actually used the "literal rule", as it were, such that Mr Raja Singham had to change "You can argue...." to "It is said that...." - what brainwrecks they are !

Second funny thing :
Mr Raja Singham was there, behind the rostrum, and telling us, "Don't be like those superheroes - studying for four or five chapters and expecting to answer all the four questions they have to answer." Laughs came from the class. And he continued, "I'd call them idiots !" More laughs came from the class.

Third funny thing:
This one is concerned with delegated legislation - in the UK, authority is given by the Parliament to government bodies, ministers, local or nationalised bodies to create law. The power to create law is conferred unto them by an Enabling Act. So there're three types of delegated legislation - Orders in Council, made by the Prime Minister and the Cabinet (usually in cases of emergency), Statutory Instruments (SI), usually made by ministers or ministries, and byelaws, made by local/nationalised bodies.

So there was this question containing a passage, and they asked us what kind of delegated legislation it was. Mr Raja Singham practically gave the answer to us - instead of saying "What kind of delegated legislation is this ?" he said, "What kind of SI is this ?" and the whole class roared in laughter. That question was null and void !

Fourth funny thing :
Mr Raja Singham wrote notes for us - earlier there were nine advantages and nine disadvantages of Alternative Dispute Resolution (i.e. resolving civil disputes outside the courts), then he shortened it to six. But today he said, "Write three advantages and three disadvantages if you're on a time constraint. Better to have three advantages and three disadvantages. Don't end up writing six advantages and leave out the disadvantages. That's a BIG disadvantage !" To that, the whole class burst out in laughter.

Man. I'll be seeing him again for Law lectures on Sunday. I can't wait :)