September 23, 2020

Fiction Of Law

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

LEGAL FICTION – ABSURDITY IN LAW

A legal fiction is a fact assumed or created by courts[1] which is then used in order to apply a legal rule. Legal fiction allows an intellectual tradition of defining a legal standard such as by way of a person, which has resulted in the creation of classic hypothetical figures in law including: The man on the Clapham omnibus, the right-thinking member of society, the officious bystander, the “reasonable parent,” the “reasonable landlord,” and the “fair-minded and informed observer,” and stretching back to Roman jurists, the figure of the bonus paterfamilias.[2] Legal fictions are mostly encountered under common law systems.

While all creation of law is subject to unintended consequences, that resulting from legal fiction can produce particular outrage because it follows from a premise in pure fantasy.[3] Legal fictions may be counterintuitive to those surprised to hear logic from fantasy as a means to administer justice in the modern course of everyday life, but they are preserved to advance public policy and preserve the rights of certain individuals and institutions. Such an example is when a corporation is treated in judicial proceedings as if it were a “natural person” and thus has the same legal rights and responsibilities as a natural person.

It’s alleged legal fiction is used as a definition or means for an improvised solution to *antinomy in law,[citation needed] such as the Morton’s fork or double bind in the rules of the United Kingdom Houses of Parliament which specify that a Member of Parliament cannot resign from office, but since the law also states that a Member of Parliament who is appointed to a paid office of the Crown must either step down or stand for re-election, the effect of a resignation can be accomplished by appointment to such an office. The second rule is used to circumvent the first rule.

[*antinomy, a contradiction between two beliefs or conclusions that are in themselves reasonable; a paradox.]

The term “legal fiction” is not usually used in a pejorative way, and has been likened to scaffolding around a building under construction.[4]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_fiction

http://www.britannica.com/topic/antinomy

 

The assumption that a certain thing is true, and which gives to a person or thing a quality which is not natural to it, and consequently establishes, a certain disposition, which, without the fiction, would be repugnant to reason and to truth. It is an order of things which does not exist, but which the law prescribes or authorizes. It differs from presumption because it establishes as true, something which is false; whereas presumption supplies the proof of something true.

The law never feigns what is impossible. Fiction is like art; it imitates nature, but never disfigures it. It aids truth, but it ought never to destroy it. It may well suppose that what was possible, but which does not exist; but it will never feign that what was impossible actually is.

Fictions were invented by the Roman praetors who, not possessing the power to abrogate the law, were nevertheless willing to derogate from it under the pretence of doing equity. Fiction is the resource of weakness which, in order to obtain its object, assumes as a fact what is known to be contrary to truth: when the legislator desires to accomplish his object, he need not feign, he commands. Fictions of law owe their origin to the legislative usurpations of the bench.

It is said that every fiction must be framed according to the rules of law, and that every legal fiction must have equity for its object. To prevent their evil effects, they are not allowed to be carried further than the reasons which introduced them necessarily require.

The law abounds in fictions. That an estate is in abeyance; the doctrine of remitter, by which a party who has been disseised of his freehold and afterwards acquires a defective title, is remitted to his former good title; that one thing done today, is considered as done at a preceding time by the doctrine of relation; that because one thing is proved, another shall be presumed to be true, which is the case in all presumptions; that the heir, executor, and administrator stand by representation in the place of the deceased are all fictions of law. “Our various introduction of John Doe and Richard Roe; our solemn process upon disseisin by Hugh Hunt; our casually losing and finding a ship (which never was in Europe) in the parish of St. Mary Le Bow, in the ward of Cheap; our trying the validity of a will by an imaginary wager of five pounds; our imagining and compassing the king’s death, by giving information which may defeat an attack upon an enemy’s settlement in the antipodes; our charge of picking a pocket or forging a bill with force and arms; of neglecting to repair a bridge, against the peace of the king, his crown and dignity are circumstances, which, looked at by themselves, would convey an impression of no very favorable nature, with respect to the wisdom of our jurisprudence.”

FICTION OF LAW – http://www.lectlaw.com/def/f111.htm
ASSUMPTION OF RISK – http://www.lectlaw.com/def/a083.htm
PRESUMPTION – http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/p149.htm
DISSEISIN – http://www.lectlaw.com/def/d181.htm

-Office of President -Office of President of the United States -Office of President of the United States of America …are 3 separate titles? And that another definition of the word, of = without? And that United is a past tense adverb; adverb changes the verb States to adverb/verb fiction?

 

Most informed people are aware that a corporation is a “fictitious entity” – greatly ignored however is the fact the The State is equally a fictitious entity.
Both concepts are Fantasies of Law. In effect, BULLSHIT. A State is a corporation.

In 1871 the 41st US Congress changed ‘Washington D.C.’, the Government of the United States, into a commercial enterprise. This was the condition by the banks in order to lend money to the ailing states. With the contractual integration of all American states into this “Corporation” every US citizen unknowingly became practically an employee of this company (UNITED STATES CODE, Title 28, § 3002 (15) (A) (B) (C): (15) “United States” means – (A) a Federal corporation; (B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or (C) an instrumentality of the United States.) 

The imaginings of elite term smiths leading the masses using deceptions to cover up their frauds.

I recommend the Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith. The History Of the Great {Swindlers who got their} American Fortunes by Gustavus Myers. The Law Of Nations by Emerich Vattel.

based of information gleaned from the Congressional Record of the United States documenting the abuses of the peoples, lands and wealth of the United States Company once the British East Indies Company by the wealthy few… Read these volumes and learn how laws and lawmakers are used to further the aims of those who would and did effect the removal of the wealth of this great land into the coffers of the few.

Real history doesn’t say anything nice or positive about the Great Wealthy Aristocratic Americans who as it turns out are bloodlines of the Aristocratic British, The Posterity. These books are anti-collectist capitalistic. They are anti-wealthy. It is not spoken of favorably by most established sources – but nobody can deny its research and its facts. If you are a descendant of a DuPont, or a Rockefeller, or a Carnegie, or a Vanderbilt, or J. P. Morgan, or the railroad barons you will not like Gustavus Myers.

 

 

Share