One of Britain's oldest surviving laws faces partial repeal after 747 years - Polidicks

[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30334812[/url] [quote]Some of the oldest surviving legislation on Britain's statute books is set to be repealed after 747 years. Just four of the 29 sections of the Statute of Marlborough, passed in 1267 under Henry III, remain in force. Now two - covering debt collection - are deemed surplus to requirements since new laws came into force earlier this year. They are among dozens of "obsolete" laws put forward for repeal by the Law Commission. The Statute of Marlborough was signed just 32 years after the first ever Act of Parliament. ... The surviving sections, or "chapters", of the Statute of Marlborough controlled the ancient power of distress, which allowed landlords to enter a debtor's property and seize their goods. But distress was abolished by parts of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act that came into force in March. As a result, two of the four chapters - which covered how someone could use the power of distress - "serve no useful purpose" any longer, the Law Commission believes. However the other two will remain law. A chapter which forbids an individual for seeking revenge for debt non-payment without the say-so of the court is not considered obsolete, the commission says; while on the fourth, which stops tenants from ruining or selling off their land, opinions as to its ongoing legal usefulness apparently still differ.[/quote]

Better late than never I guess.

It's a testament to the way the law was written for it to have been as valid in 2014 as it was in 1267.

tbh they should at the very least rewrite a lot of the legislation passed from all these years ago. for my property law exam one of the things i have to know is the leases act 1449 (which is fucking still in force albeit its a bit limited now) and it fucking reads like this [img]http://i.imgur.com/WU0FRtQ.png[/img] [url]http://www.legislation.gov.uk/aosp/1449/6[/url]

[QUOTE=Marzipas;46643452]tbh they should at the very least rewrite a lot of the legislation passed from all these years ago. for my property law exam one of the things i have to know is the leases act 1449 (which is fucking still in force albeit its a bit limited now) and it fucking reads like this [img]http://i.imgur.com/WU0FRtQ.png[/img] [url]http://www.legislation.gov.uk/aosp/1449/6[/url][/QUOTE] I literally only understood 'male' in there.

[QUOTE=Nitro836;46643488]I literally only understood 'male' in there.[/QUOTE] It probably doesn't actually mean "male" though.

[QUOTE=Nitro836;46643488]I literally only understood 'male' in there.[/QUOTE] As weird as it is to think about, that really isn't any other language than English. It is just English written by the 12 year old of today.

[QUOTE=tinhead50;46643507]As weird as it is to think about, that really isn't any other language than English. It is just English written by the 12 year old of today.[/QUOTE] There's a bright future ahead of us if 12 year olds are smart enough to reliably type in middle English these days

[QUOTE=tinhead50;46643507]As weird as it is to think about, that really isn't any other language than English. It is just English written by the 12 year old of today.[/QUOTE] This is Tudor period, when there was no formal way to spell many words in a correct manner. Shakespear often wrote his name four different ways.

[QUOTE=Nitro836;46643488]I literally only understood 'male' in there.[/QUOTE] I picked up the words "thai male cum" and that's it.

[QUOTE=Marzipas;46643452]tbh they should at the very least rewrite a lot of the legislation passed from all these years ago. for my property law exam one of the things i have to know is the leases act 1449 (which is fucking still in force albeit its a bit limited now) and it fucking reads like this [img]http://i.imgur.com/WU0FRtQ.png[/img] [url]http://www.legislation.gov.uk/aosp/1449/6[/url][/QUOTE] Cum, Analy, Lik male... This is a law?!

[QUOTE=Marzipas;46643452]tbh they should at the very least rewrite a lot of the legislation passed from all these years ago. for my property law exam one of the things i have to know is the leases act 1449 (which is fucking still in force albeit its a bit limited now) and it fucking reads like this [img]http://i.imgur.com/WU0FRtQ.png[/img] [url]http://www.legislation.gov.uk/aosp/1449/6[/url][/QUOTE] Item it is ordained for the safety and favour of the pure people that labors the ground that they and all others that has taken or shall take lands in time to come from lords and has terms and years thereof that suppose the lords sell or ? their lands that the takers shall remain with their takes(?) on to the issue(?) of their terms whose hands at ever their lands come to for such like male as they took them of before... It is ordained that, for the safety and favor of the pure people who labor upon the ground, that they and all others who have been leased (taken) the land by the lord or shall lease (take) the land in time to come, and who have terms and years thereof, supposing that the lord sells the lands, that the tenants (takers) shall remain with their take on the issue of their terms, [no matter] whose hands the lands ever fall into, the same as [whose hands] took them (they fell into) before. In favor of people to whom land has been leased (or shall be leased), if the owner decides to sell the land, the terms and years of the tenants' leases shall still be maintained, no matter whom the land is sold to, the same as they were before with the previous owner. That's my guess

[QUOTE=Marzipas;46643452]tbh they should at the very least rewrite a lot of the legislation passed from all these years ago. for my property law exam one of the things i have to know is the leases act 1449 (which is fucking still in force albeit its a bit limited now) and it fucking reads like this [img]http://i.imgur.com/WU0FRtQ.png[/img] [url]http://www.legislation.gov.uk/aosp/1449/6[/url][/QUOTE] a lot of this is actually readable if you just ignore the spelling

[QUOTE=Kentz;46645525]a lot of this is actually readable if you just ignore the spelling[/QUOTE] Well, given that the only necessary element for writing at that point was readability, that makes sense.

[QUOTE=Kentz;46645525]a lot of this is actually readable if you just ignore the spelling[/QUOTE] if you can decipher what they're trying to spell, atleast

Isn't there still a law on the books forbidding entrance into parliament while wearing a suit of armor?

arent most of these laws not enforced/enforceable anyway? i just thought the reason they havent been gotten rid of already is that its probably a lengthy process and theres a lot of them that need cleaning up, and if someone did actually try to exploit some obscure law then their defense would be dismissed anyway.