Oh dear...

No, this is not a post about the vermin that has infested our society, corruption etc. Please do excuse my sense of humour, which is no different from a 10 year olds..But this is what I overheard recently:

A bunch of ladies, just chilling out at a parlour... about 3-4 of them. The centre of the conversation was this who I'll call the Punjabi Hen. Anyway, PH was narrating all her aches and pains and the other ladies would 'cluck cluck' and 'hmmm' in harmony at exactly the right moments...

ANYWHO. THEN.. WHen I had just started getting my eyebrows done.. she drops THE bombshell

PH: Pata hai, mujhe naak ka problem bahut rehta hai. Kuch din pehlay doctor nay drops diye laganay kay liye....

PH: kher mera nose itchy tha... i would scratch it and forget abt it.

PH: phir main bathroom gaye.. naak ko DEKHA aur mere naak say KEERAY NIKAL RAHAY THAY

Other ladies: 'Hawwww hayyee'

Me: *sound between a gag and hysterical laughter*

PH: 'Nikkay nikkay chittay chittay Keeraay' ( small small white white insects)

Me: *starts planning exit strategy even though only one eyebrow had been shaped* - I think I also tasted some vomit..

PH: 'Haan doctor na kaha kaay naak aik cavity hai, keeray par saktay hain...

Me: *WTH!*

By this point I couldnt control myself and was laughing, albeit silently. the lady shaping my eyebrows saw my shoulders shaking and she started laughing too.

ofcourse there were more pearls of wisdom:

PH: bus dekhain na, Jism toh keeron say bana hua hai

Me: *snorts with laughter accidently* , get a dirty look

PH: kisi kisi kay toh DIMAGH MAIN BHI KEERA HOTA HAI

THAT was the straw that broke the camels back and i ran out of the parlour and laughed my head off, with people thinking... Okaaaay shes mad! When I had calmed down, I came in, let the lady finish shaping, paid and left.

I really think it is SO important us women have SOMETHING to do. something better than to sit at parlours discussing INSECTS .. that too in their NOSE. I mean, thats just news for me?! WHAT!?!?!?!?!?!?! HOW is the human body made out of insects, aunty, PLEASE do tell me. Or is this some kind of evolution I haven't heard of? Or maybe perhaps shes a zombie from 'The Mummy'. I just cannot make sense out of it. Any doctors out there to verify the truth of the statement? or ANYONE! Ive never heard of such a thing and Im disgusted ( yet highly amused) for some odd reason...God help me..

Aaj Juma hai.. isi liye!

me: suno Pareshan Bhai, zara yeh file toh photocopy karwa dain? Annexures bhi saath hon, evidence kay liye Lahore High Court jaani hai.

Pareshan Bhai (all decked up in crisp white shalwar kamiz and has put on a truck load of ATTAR) : Desi L Ji, woh kaam zarra aaj nahin ho sakta hai

me : Aray, PB, aaj juma hai aur har halat main bhejna hai!

PB: yehi toh main kehna cha raha hoon... Aaj Juma hai aur isi liye nahin ho sakta hai!!

This conversation took place at 11 am. quite some time BEFORE the friday prayers!!
This conversation is just an example of the general attitude of people at my firm. Somehow, as soon as its friday EVERYONE assumes its chillaxing day. Bhaie, you get a 1.5 hour break ( stretched to 2 hours in most cases) read namaz, eat your lunch.. and GET ON WITH WORK! now, i dont mean to be a kill joy, but works gotta be done right?

so thats the general atmoshere at the mo... people chilling with cups of coffee... gossiping for ages... at 11 am debating upon whether to order a Big Mac or Double cheese burger. discussing the merits and demerits of each. the Big Boss himself strolled in NOW, i.e. 12 pm. Am I the only N.E.R.D around here? *GASP*

hmmm wonder if I should catch a movie during lunch break?

Why did the chicken cross the road?

Ok so heres the deal.. I've come across about a zillion and one lawyer jokes along the lines of knock knock jokes (basically,very corny) and ofcourse there's this general mentality amongst people that ALL lawyers are bad, scary, money grabbing individuals... Its not completely wrong at some level but hey not everyones like that. Take the Wise Guy at my firm... Gods gift to the legal fraternity..or so he thinks ;) Dont get me wrong, he does know what hes doing...but the nature of our work means that not everything's black and white. There are a lot of grey areas involved and I feel the most important thing to do is to LISTEN to what the other person is going on about. I feel that in a profession such as ours,listening is very important. If you have the gift of the gab, then everything's hunky dory.. but LISTEN! In a way I guess this applies to anyone really....

Moral of the story: Not all lawyers are ruthless sharks! some of them do have hearts, honest!

Anywho, I guess most of us have somewhat of a sense of humour and can laugh at ourselves. Enjoy the (perhaps lame) jokes




What's the difference between a bankrupt attorney and a pigeon?

The pigeon can still make a deposit on a Mercedes.


What do you get when you cross a lawyer with a demon from hell?

No changes occur.


What's the difference between a lawyer and a bucket of pond scum?

The bucket.


What's the difference between God and an attorney?

God doesn't think he's an attorney.


How many lawyers does it take to screw in a light bulb?

One; the lawyer holds it while the rest of the world revolves around him.

Basics 101

I came across an interesting article today...ofcourse, I shouldn't have been browsing for 'interesting ' stuff when I really should be drafting that affidavit 'Tiny Toon', my boss, has assigned me to do. I suppose its the side effect of so many holidays, just cannot bring myself to do any work..

Also point number 9 brings me to my all time favourite topic... independence of the Judiciary! Kind of a hot topic in Desi Land these days, as most not living in a box will be well aware. To be honest I'm really sick of all this now. The Lawyer's movement has become WAY too political...and its harming the profession big time... strikes, court closing..bad press abroad..

Anyway, the movement was REALLY ironic to begin with anyway.. What independence are they talking about? Was it not the very same judiciary that permitted the ex-Pres(so called) to get away with absolutely everything and formalised his position. Where was their independence then? and was it not the same judiciary, albeit many years ago, that sanctioned the murder of a deposed head of state? Independence, Bah humbug!

Anywho, enough of that, here's ten key legal principles that every law student in their first year should know about. Makes life a lot simpler, me thinks!

Ten key legal principles - by Gary Slapper

The law is governed by thousands of principles. Some apply only within a narrow field, while others are hardly used. Some are of profound importance


1. Parliamentary sovereignty

The highest power in British democracy is that of the electorate — expressed through its representatives in Parliament. This is the supreme (or “sovereign”) power. Legislation can be used to make any imaginable law. In 1917 Lord Justice Scrutton contemplated that a statute could make “two plus two equal to five”. Some economists, though, have been doing that for a while.

2. The separation of powers

Rooted in ideas of Aristotle, and popularised by the French writer Montesquieu, this precept notes that there are three types of governmental function: legislative, executive and judicial. If more than one of those is given to one person or agency, it is a threat to the freedom of citizens. Not rigidly applicable in the UK as, for example, the law lords are judicial, but they sometimes “legislate” new law in their decisions.

3. The rule of law

This is a defining characteristic of civilised democracies. Famously articulated by the Victorian jurist A. V. Dicey, the principle means that everyone, however powerful, must obey the democratically passed law, and no one is above the law. The rules are more important than important people. We are ruled by the rules, not by rulers.

4. Discharging the standard of proof

For criminal and civil court cases to succeed, those bringing them must prove them to a required standard. In criminal cases, for a conviction, the prosecution must prove its case “beyond reasonable doubt”. In civil cases, the party bringing the action must prove its case “on the balance of probabilities”; in other words that it is more likely than not.

5. Ignorance of the law is no excuse

If you break the law, you can’t escape the consequences by saying you were unaware of it. Mr Justice Talfourd said in 1850: “The rule is not that a man is always presumed to know the law, but that no man shall be excused for an unlawful act from his ignorance of the law.” Chief Justice Abbott, however, cautiously noted: “God forbid it should be imagined that an attorney, or a counsel, or even a judge is bound to know all the law.”

6. Better that ten guilty men go free than that one innocent person is convicted

Encapsulated by Sir William Blackstone (1769) as: “Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.” The horror of an innocent person condemned to suffer as guilty is notorious. King Alfred is reported to have hanged a judge who executed a defendant when the jurors were doubtful about their verdict, “for in cases of doubt one should rather save than condemn”.

7. Proportionality

A key principle of European and human rights jurisprudence demands that a law should be proportionate to what needs to be done by it. So, in 2005, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that legislation that indiscriminately banned every UK prisoner from voting was a disproportionate measure because it brought that extra punishment on all prisoners irrespective of their crime.

8. Justice must be seen to be done

Nothing to do with people watching cases from the public galleries. It means that if anything even looks as if it might compromise justice it is unacceptable. If a judge had some shares in a company that would be affected by a judgment he gave, his decision would be invalidated because it might look suspicious, even if he had forgotten about his shares.

9. Independence of the judiciary

Public confidence in the judiciary requires that judges decide cases according to law and not according to bribery, threats or political pressure. Various rules promote free and fearless judging — judicial salaries are not annually approved by Parliament; judges cannot be sued for any judicial utterances or sacked for their judicial rulings.

10. Law should not be retrospective

It is unfair to make a law today that applies to the past. Statutes are presumed to apply only prospectively. There are exceptions. The War Damage Act 1965 was passed to apply backwards and stop the Government having to pay compensation for damage resulting from military orders in 1942. Chutzpah perhaps but see (above) parliamentary sovereignty.

Fat cat (to be)

Its official....exactly a year and some months ago I was thrown into the deep end.. the big, bad world of litigation.. It was all exciting at first, with me having a Boston Legal/Rumpole-ish sort of image of the legal fraternity in my "Home Country" AKA Desi Land.. Which ofcourse was EXTREMELY optimistic/stupid of me. I suppose spending time in the (now seemingly) snazzy Crown Courts and the (slightly less snazzier) Mags in England didn't really help. Dont get me wrong. I have nothing against the High Court back home but goodness me, the District Court is just on a planet of its own. I'd say it was more like huge market...with people from all walks of life hanging out there.. That includes criminals in shackles.. just hanging out. Court proceedings taking place in [insert language of choice]. To cut a long story short, lets just say that Advocacy 1, 2 and 3 went flying out of the window then. Sorry, tutors, but when in Desi Land, you've gotta do what the Desis do.

Ok thats finished my complaining quota of the day.....