In these days of plain English and legislation against unfair and unclear terms in consumer contracts, one can’t help wishing that there was something similar which applied to statutory instruments.
I have been trying to make sense of The Disability Discrimination (Premises) Regulations 2006 but I have to say that so far I have found them almost wholly impenetrable. Of course this may be because their general literary style is so deeply boring it is difficult to work up much interest in mentally cross referencing the necessary three or four sections so you can work out what the section you are looking at is talking about.
If this sort of thing was printed in a consumer contract it would be slated by the OFT as unfair and be unenforceable. But although this is not a contract, it is relevant to consumers, as presumably not only lawyers will need to know about disability discrimination in premises. But it is drafted in such a way that most ordinary people will never be able to understand it. Even the explanatory note at the bottom is not wholly clear. Would that treasury draftsmen were subject to the same drafting rules as the rest of us!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Cool Followers
Popular entries
-
Incident: Sick Kids physician loses portable hard-drive with unencrypted personal health informationA physician from Sick Kids hospital who decided to travel with a portable hard-drive containing unencrypted health information on 3,300 pat...
-
INSOL Europe recently published a report titled Harmonisation of Insolvency Law at EU Law Level : see here ( pdf ). The report outlines di...
-
The Information and Privacy Commissioner of Alberta released a very interesting order today, considering whether the right to freedom of exp...
-
On June 23, Australia's Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services published a report titled Better sharehold...
-
Apparently the American government is about to implement its latest version of the no-fly list, without data mining using commercial sources...
-
"Police tried to calm the teen, but Holyfield became combative, according to the statement. Officers fired the stun gun at him after he...
-
Several months ago the Court of Appeal gave judgment in Moore Stephens (a firm) v Stone & Rolls Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 644 and it would ap...
-
If all those who say they should be in prison are willing to pay for that through their chequebooks rather than mine and many other taxpayer...
-
A few matters on the subject of tenancy deposit protection which I have been meaning to comment on for a while. The August issue of Legal Ac...
-
The High Court gave judgment today in Stainer v Lee & Ors [2010] EWHC 1539 (Ch) . Although only a first instance decision, it is neverth...
Comments
Post a comment on: One rule for treasury draftsmen ...