De minimis rule and spellings

Victor · 12-04-2019 06:38AM #1

If I call the judge a cnut *, will it be known what I am speaking of?

More generally, can one get away with using a deliberate misspelling to abuse a rule of law, e.g. trade as Joe Bloggs Ldt. while not having a limited company.

I am aware that some legislation use the phrase "cognate words shall be construed accordingly" to get around some such shenanigans.

*

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knut_(polar_bear)

Peregrinus · 12-04-2019 07:28AM

Victor wrote: »

If I call the judge a cnut *, will it be known what I can speaking of?

Yes.

Victor wrote: »

More generally, can one get away with using a deliberate misspelling to abuse a rule of law, e.g. trade as Joe Bloggs Ldt. while not having a limited company.

No. Obvious intention to mislead the public there. Only way you could hope to get away with it is if you make such a big deal out of your not-quite-right word that even an idiot in a hurry would appreciate that the whole point of the word was the contrast with the usual word - e.g if you call your discount mobile phone shop "Mobile Phone Warehouse UNLIMITED!!!", nobody will think you are thereby claiming to be a limited company.

Victor wrote: »

I am aware that some legislation use the phrase "cognate words shall be construed accordingly" to get around some such shenanigans.

Nothing to do with that at all. A provision like that means, basically, "Look, we have defined the word 'licence' for you. Please understand that that's the kind of licence we're talking about when we use words like 'licensed', 'unlicensed' and 'licenceholder'."

GM228 · 12-04-2019 07:40AM

Victor wrote: »

If I call the judge a cnut *, will it be known what I can speaking of?

Try it and see how you get on, tell the judge you were comparing them to a great Viking King.

Yes that's correct Canute the Great was actually Cnut the Great, but there are mixed views as to exactly why Cnut became Canute, some suggest Pope Paschal II coined it because he could not pronounce Cnut whilst others suggest it was changed to avoid confusion with c**t or stop the King being called the nut King

Victor · 12-04-2019 08:26AM

https://www.thejournal.ie/dietitian-speech-language-therapist-legally-protected-titles-3058745-Nov2016/

http://www.engineersireland.ie/membership/registered-titles.aspx

So certain titles are protected, e.g. "Chartered Engineer", if I were to call myself a "Chartered Ingineer", a judge would see through the semantics and convict (I've not studied the niceties of claiming to be a Chartered Engineer).

Let's assume a simple claim to be a Chartered Ingineer and not one where a building fell down.

godtabh · 12-04-2019 08:30AM

Victor wrote: »

https://www.thejournal.ie/dietitian-speech-language-therapist-legally-protected-titles-3058745-Nov2016/

http://www.engineersireland.ie/membership/registered-titles.aspx

So certain titles are protected, e.g. "Chartered Engineer", if I were to call myself a "Chartered Ingineer", a judge would see through the semantics and convict (I've not studied the niceties of claiming to be a Chartered Engineer).

Let's assume a simple claim to be a Chartered Ingineer and not one where a building fell down.

only certain functions of charted engineer are projected.

My understanding is that act of calling yourself a chartered engineer while carrying out one of the functions is illegal.

Calling yourself a charted engineer while washing some ones car isnt.

Peregrinus · 12-04-2019 08:34AM

Mmm. Penal statutes are narrowly construed, so if the offence lies in using the term "chartered engineer" and you use a slightly different term, I don't think you could be convicted of the offence of using the term "chartered engineer".

However, if charged with a fraud/deception/holding out-type offence, calling yourself a "chartered ingineer" would probably be enough to tick the box on the dishonesty/intention to mislead element of the offence. Similarly in a civil action in which it was argued that you held yourself out as a chartered engineer.

GM228 · 12-04-2019 08:41AM

I wonder if different uses of the word could in fact be illegal (obviously depending on how so used) based on vocabulary differences?

For example in Scotland ingineer is another word for engineer. So if a Scottish person used the word here, the fact that their vocabulary implies the same I wonder could it have any bearing on it's use in terms of an offence? Have never heard of such, but who knows and there are no doubt other words in titles which could have similar effect.

Victor · 12-04-2019 08:55AM

This thread also brought to you by Sleep Deprivation™.

godtabh · 12-04-2019 09:50AM

There is also the Eur Ing title

NUTLEY BOY · 12-04-2019 10:19AM

Over time judges do catch up especially if they have youngsters at home to explain the terminology

Failing that, those judicial assistants are very knowledgeable.

Most judges in England eventually understood what was meant by Linford Christie's lunch box and some even know who Gazza [Paul Gascoigne] is.

Against this I am certain that 99% of judges would recognise the word play at work and that same proportion would get great pleasure in court from pretending that they didn't, especially if the case before them was getting very boring.......

Grolschevik · 12-04-2019 11:14AM

GM228 wrote: »

I wonder if different uses of the word could in fact be illegal (obviously depending on how so used) based on vocabulary differences?

For example in Scotland ingineer is another word for engineer. So if a Scottish person used the word here, the fact that their vocabulary implies the same I wonder could it have any bearing on it's use in terms of an offence? Have never heard of such, but who knows and there are no doubt other words in titles which could have similar effect.

"Mr McElwee, this post calls for a graduate qualification in accountancy, sooo....?"

"On the contrary, Mr Snodgrass, I think you will find that the job placement advertisement in the paper of record stated, in Ulster Scots, 'ye maun hae college letters efter yer name adae wae business and hannlin money an pitten siller wittens thegither'. I fail to see how my sixth form college GCSE (pass) in business does not apply."

De minimis rule and spellings

Comments