What do you think?
Rate this book
Uncommon Law: Being 66 Misleading Cases Revised and Collected in One Volume
Absurdities of English law are illustrated in 66 satirical essays that are thought-provoking and amusing. Some of the cases presented, no matter how ridiculous, are still studied today. There is the famous case of Albert Haddock, who wrote out a check to the Collector of Taxes on a cow. Then there is the case of Mr. and Mrs. Pratt, who, although happily married, got divorced in order to pay less income tax. This book will teach more about legal proceedings than most lawyers know, provided the reader can stop laughing long enough to learn.
- GenresLawHumorNonfictionEssays
494 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1920
About the author
A.P. Herbert
104 books8 followersSir Alan Patrick Herbert, CH (usually writing as A.P. Herbert or A.P.H.) was an English humorist, novelist, playwright and law reform activist. He was an independent Member of Parliament (MP) for Oxford University for 15 years, five of which he combined with service in the Royal Navy.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
September 16, 2010
I cannot understand why A.P. Herbert is not more famous than he is, for this book is a fascinating, funny and thought-provoking collection of fake legal cases and until I stumbled across Herbert's name in Wikipedia while looking for something else, I had never heard of him. He really ought to rank up next to P.G. Wodehouse et al as being one of the top humorists of that time and place.
Uncommon Law showcases much of the stupidity and silliness inherent in British law at that time. Cases are included illustrating the sheer ludicrousness of, for example, the following things:
1. There was, at the time, no such thing as a no-fault divorce. (This has, thank goodness, been corrected.) To get a divorce you had to accuse your partner of something like cruelty, adultery, etc. In a lot of cases couples who wanted to split up would stage an adultery, having the husband conspicuously check into a hotel for the night with a "mistress" hired for the occasion, just so they could get out of the marriage.
2. BUT if it was proven that both husband AND wife had misconducted themselves (committed adultery, for example), then the marriage had to stand.
3. The difference between a felony and a misdemeanor is a very significant one for the criminal record (a felony being considered a more serious crime and having much more severe consequences than a misdemeanor), but it is also completely meaningless. It had grown impossible to tell whether a particular offense was a felony, or a misdemeanor.
4. The government put a tax on lectures and performances, except when they were educational. However, they didn't recognize that such events could be both entertaining and educational, and tried to tax those, so in effect a lecture or play had to be boring to claim the tax exemption.
Herbert appears to be somewhat of a libertarian. Quoting from the book: "I understand that in the opinion of all Government Departments all fun is prima facie illegal, and, if it is not illegal, deserves to be taxed."
This book was written in the latter half of the twentieth century, but many of the legal issues therein are still highly relevant today. For instance, "Rex vs. Bloggs, What is Education?" is an excellent defense of homeschooling. And several of the cases deal with the issue of the police enticing people to commit violations, then arresting them for it. (To this day, do the police not send in underage teenagers to try to buy cigarettes?)
Lawyers in particular would love this book, but I would recommend it for any intelligent person who likes humor that will make them think as well as laugh.
Uncommon Law showcases much of the stupidity and silliness inherent in British law at that time. Cases are included illustrating the sheer ludicrousness of, for example, the following things:
1. There was, at the time, no such thing as a no-fault divorce. (This has, thank goodness, been corrected.) To get a divorce you had to accuse your partner of something like cruelty, adultery, etc. In a lot of cases couples who wanted to split up would stage an adultery, having the husband conspicuously check into a hotel for the night with a "mistress" hired for the occasion, just so they could get out of the marriage.
2. BUT if it was proven that both husband AND wife had misconducted themselves (committed adultery, for example), then the marriage had to stand.
3. The difference between a felony and a misdemeanor is a very significant one for the criminal record (a felony being considered a more serious crime and having much more severe consequences than a misdemeanor), but it is also completely meaningless. It had grown impossible to tell whether a particular offense was a felony, or a misdemeanor.
4. The government put a tax on lectures and performances, except when they were educational. However, they didn't recognize that such events could be both entertaining and educational, and tried to tax those, so in effect a lecture or play had to be boring to claim the tax exemption.
Herbert appears to be somewhat of a libertarian. Quoting from the book: "I understand that in the opinion of all Government Departments all fun is prima facie illegal, and, if it is not illegal, deserves to be taxed."
This book was written in the latter half of the twentieth century, but many of the legal issues therein are still highly relevant today. For instance, "Rex vs. Bloggs, What is Education?" is an excellent defense of homeschooling. And several of the cases deal with the issue of the police enticing people to commit violations, then arresting them for it. (To this day, do the police not send in underage teenagers to try to buy cigarettes?)
Lawyers in particular would love this book, but I would recommend it for any intelligent person who likes humor that will make them think as well as laugh.
November 6, 2022
This and What If? should really be thought of as sister books. They do the same thing, take absurd situations and apply a set of rules and logical thinking to their solutions. Uncommon Law does this for law. What If? does it for science.
September 17, 2012
Well, that was fun. I first heard about this out-of-print book through a rec on my chat list.
66 close parodies of English law-case reports -- so close is the satire, in some cases, that they were sometimes subsequently mistaken for the real thing. Most of them apparently appeared as short humorous articles in Punch in the 1920s and 1930s -- social, legal, and technological issues and attitudes of the day are both consciously and unconsciously showcased. It is interesting, for example, to see the comments and side-comments as that society struggles to come to grips with this new technology of the motor-car, when the new rules of the road were just being worked out -- as usual for law, the hard way.
The "negotiable cow" may be the most famous of these "66 Misleading Cases" (that subtitle itself is a send-up of a real law tome titled Leading Cases), but I was also quite fond of the argument about right-of-way on a flooded road between a motor-car and a rowboat -- one of which is required to keep to its left, the other to its right, by their respective codes. Mr Albert Haddock is well on his way to becoming a small hero of mine, as well as a day-brightener to some of the bewigged and beleaguered judges before whom he repeatedly brings his conundrums.
There is a huge amount I don't know about the intricacies of British law -- not to mention American law -- but for brief faux-dry writings, a deal of illuminating characterization, and on-going accumulating characterization as certain names appeared repeatedly, also comes through.
Very good bedtime reading, due to the short episodic structure and mostly unharrowing content. Recommended.
Ta, L.
66 close parodies of English law-case reports -- so close is the satire, in some cases, that they were sometimes subsequently mistaken for the real thing. Most of them apparently appeared as short humorous articles in Punch in the 1920s and 1930s -- social, legal, and technological issues and attitudes of the day are both consciously and unconsciously showcased. It is interesting, for example, to see the comments and side-comments as that society struggles to come to grips with this new technology of the motor-car, when the new rules of the road were just being worked out -- as usual for law, the hard way.
The "negotiable cow" may be the most famous of these "66 Misleading Cases" (that subtitle itself is a send-up of a real law tome titled Leading Cases), but I was also quite fond of the argument about right-of-way on a flooded road between a motor-car and a rowboat -- one of which is required to keep to its left, the other to its right, by their respective codes. Mr Albert Haddock is well on his way to becoming a small hero of mine, as well as a day-brightener to some of the bewigged and beleaguered judges before whom he repeatedly brings his conundrums.
There is a huge amount I don't know about the intricacies of British law -- not to mention American law -- but for brief faux-dry writings, a deal of illuminating characterization, and on-going accumulating characterization as certain names appeared repeatedly, also comes through.
Very good bedtime reading, due to the short episodic structure and mostly unharrowing content. Recommended.
Ta, L.
March 15, 2015
Among the funniest and wise books I have ever read and re-read: most of the stories I first read in my father's bound volumes of Punch (published well before I was born), and they are still sparkling fresh.
The kind of author who becomes an imaginary friend.
The kind of author who becomes an imaginary friend.
July 19, 2020
This book – the basis for a very funny TV series in the 1960s – consists of 66 short stories by A. P. Herbert, one-time MP and general wit. The 'stories', though, all take the form of mock court judgements, so that the title of a story might be Rex v Haddock, and the reader has to look in the smaller print for clues on what is to follow. My favourite is Port to Port, in which a river has burst its banks, and Albert Haddock, in his rowing boat, collides with a car slowly coming along the flooded road... but should they have passed "starboard to starboard" (as on a road), or "port to port" by the law of the sea?
A handful of the Misleading Cases are very famous, such as The Negotiable Cow, in which it transpires that the insufferable Albert Haddock has paid his tax bill by writing the cheque on a cow – apparently quite legally – and leading the cow to the tax office. The judge asks, for instance:
"Was the cow crossed?"
"No, My Lord, it was an open cow."
A lot of readers nowadays wouldn't understand that, nor would they know that all cheques used to require a 2d stamp – so the cow had a 2d stamp affixed to its horn.
There's little doubt that Herbert was a witty man, a lawyer and influential politician as well as a writer in many different genres. But I'm not sure that every reader will lap everything up. The book is out of print, by the way.
A handful of the Misleading Cases are very famous, such as The Negotiable Cow, in which it transpires that the insufferable Albert Haddock has paid his tax bill by writing the cheque on a cow – apparently quite legally – and leading the cow to the tax office. The judge asks, for instance:
"Was the cow crossed?"
"No, My Lord, it was an open cow."
A lot of readers nowadays wouldn't understand that, nor would they know that all cheques used to require a 2d stamp – so the cow had a 2d stamp affixed to its horn.
There's little doubt that Herbert was a witty man, a lawyer and influential politician as well as a writer in many different genres. But I'm not sure that every reader will lap everything up. The book is out of print, by the way.
May 18, 2018
A wonderful collection of fake legal cases. Much funnier than it sounds. Consider:
'It is a principle of English law that a person who appears in a police court has done something undesirable, and citizens who take it upon themselves sot do unusual actions which attract the attention of the police should be careful to bring those actions into one of the recognized crimes and offences, for it is intolerable that the police should be put to the pains of inventing reasons for finding them undesirable... It is not for me to say what offence the appellants has committed, but I am satisfied he has committed some offence, for which he has been most properly punished.' (R v. Haddock, 'Is it a free country?)
Some bits of it have been cited with approval by some of the American state courts, who don't seem to have gotten the joke. Recommended to all lawyers, and interested non-lawyers.
'It is a principle of English law that a person who appears in a police court has done something undesirable, and citizens who take it upon themselves sot do unusual actions which attract the attention of the police should be careful to bring those actions into one of the recognized crimes and offences, for it is intolerable that the police should be put to the pains of inventing reasons for finding them undesirable... It is not for me to say what offence the appellants has committed, but I am satisfied he has committed some offence, for which he has been most properly punished.' (R v. Haddock, 'Is it a free country?)
Some bits of it have been cited with approval by some of the American state courts, who don't seem to have gotten the joke. Recommended to all lawyers, and interested non-lawyers.
June 1, 2024
English Common law will never be the same thanks to A.P. Herbert who was a staff writer for Punch. 66 cases later, with special attention to libel and slander, Herbert is my new hero, as is his most popular creation, Haddock. Much beloved in its time, I wish everyone was required to read Uncommon Law before being admitted to the Bar. Now on to the rest of Herbert's books as Haddock closes in on Parliament.
Read
December 22, 2023An interesting collections of cases that demonstrate how out of touch the law can be and how interesting were the judges in England during the early 29th century.
April 28, 2016
Superb. The reports from fake legal cases. Clever, dry, subtle humour. Faultless style. Gently highlights the absurdities of the legal system. I particularly like the style of very precise and unambiguous English, which features in real legal judgements. Speaking of which, have you tried reading any real judgements from the British high court? Some of them are almost as funny as the fake ones! Which reminds me...
Here's a group-test article from the legal periodical "Judge Monthly", which ranks the current British Law Lords. Given the misogyny rife in our legal system, the result will be no surprise...
This month our group test ranks our top judges, the law lords, so you can decide who you want in your corner when a big appeal’s at stake. Here’s the line-up…
Lord Neuberger, Lord Mance, Baroness Hale, Lord Sumption, Lord Toulson, Lord Hodge, Lord Carwash of Notting Hill, Lord Hughes of Omberley, Lord Reed, Lord Kerr of Tonaghmore, Lord Clark of Stone-cum-Ebony, Lord Wilson of Culworth.
We’re sure you’ll agree it’s an impressive list of top law contenders, with Baroness Hale standing out as the sole lady lord. But how will they compare? We ranked them on the factors that research has shown to have the highest predictive validity for judgely success. And here are the results…
Age
Age is still the most important attribute of a law lord, and don’t let anyone tell you otherwise. Top of the tree, weighing in at a venerable 89, is Lord Kerr, who gets the full ten points in the age category. Lord ‘Lou’ Reed, 86, is another impressive performer on the age front, bagging 9 points. At the bottom of the pile, callow duffer Baroness Hale, 58, gets one point.
Education
With solid Oxbridge degrees, ten of the law lords share the honours here, netting ten points each. Lords Hughes and Kerr confess to graduating from Durham and Belfast respectively, earning just one point each.
Judgely Cognomen
It’s hard to win respect for your judgements if you have to sign them off with a wimpish name, so the judgely cognomen is a vital attribute for a top-scoring law lord. Ranking our twelve contenders caused considerable disputation in the office, but in the end we awarded the top ten points to Lord Sumption, on the grounds that his title combined gravitas with endless opportunities for puns on the common legal terms assumption and presumption, thus alleviating the tedium of life in chambers. The bottom ranking and one point goes to Lord Carwash of Notting Hill for his wholly inappropriate choice of title, no doubt the unfortunate result of a rogue auto-correct macro in the ancient word-processor used by the Privy Council.
Sternness of Countenance
A law lord has to look the part, with a grim, forbidding, and authoritarian aspect that will strike terror into those minded to try their tricks in court. Clear winner, therefore, is Lord Neuberger, while Baroness Hale’s entirely inappropriate smiley face gets nil points.
Gender
Eleven of the current law lords are men, each gaining a well-deserved ten points. Letting the side down is the Baroness Hale of Richmond, who gets the booby prize of one point.
Entertainment value
It’s not much fun being stuck in court while your legal team burns through your meagre savings at fifteen grand an hour, so at the very least you might hope for something worth reading at the end of it. We’ve looked through every judgement written by every one of the twelve current lords and ranked them for entertainment value. Bottom of the rankings is Lord ‘Lou’ Reed, whose dour, heavy-handed, tedious prose, and predictable judgements have a truly soporific quality. Best for deliberate humour is Lord Mance- you can picture a twinkle in his eye as you read his deliciously witty observations on case law. However, for out-and-out make-you-laugh fun one judge stands head and shoulders above the rest- Lord Toulson’s judgements are downright hilarious, with their gaffes and non-sequiturs. His misapplication of the principle of duum escheat in fifo demens had the office in stitches.
Verdict
The overall points show that our law lords are a pretty even set, with compensating strengths and weakness- a tribute to the selection process established by Professor Sushing in 2006- with all bar one gaining an impressive 40 points. The unsurprising exception is Baroness Hale who creeps home with just 20 points, suggesting there may be some validity for the universally held belief among the legal profession that law lords should be just that- lords.
Here's a group-test article from the legal periodical "Judge Monthly", which ranks the current British Law Lords. Given the misogyny rife in our legal system, the result will be no surprise...
This month our group test ranks our top judges, the law lords, so you can decide who you want in your corner when a big appeal’s at stake. Here’s the line-up…
Lord Neuberger, Lord Mance, Baroness Hale, Lord Sumption, Lord Toulson, Lord Hodge, Lord Carwash of Notting Hill, Lord Hughes of Omberley, Lord Reed, Lord Kerr of Tonaghmore, Lord Clark of Stone-cum-Ebony, Lord Wilson of Culworth.
We’re sure you’ll agree it’s an impressive list of top law contenders, with Baroness Hale standing out as the sole lady lord. But how will they compare? We ranked them on the factors that research has shown to have the highest predictive validity for judgely success. And here are the results…
Age
Age is still the most important attribute of a law lord, and don’t let anyone tell you otherwise. Top of the tree, weighing in at a venerable 89, is Lord Kerr, who gets the full ten points in the age category. Lord ‘Lou’ Reed, 86, is another impressive performer on the age front, bagging 9 points. At the bottom of the pile, callow duffer Baroness Hale, 58, gets one point.
Education
With solid Oxbridge degrees, ten of the law lords share the honours here, netting ten points each. Lords Hughes and Kerr confess to graduating from Durham and Belfast respectively, earning just one point each.
Judgely Cognomen
It’s hard to win respect for your judgements if you have to sign them off with a wimpish name, so the judgely cognomen is a vital attribute for a top-scoring law lord. Ranking our twelve contenders caused considerable disputation in the office, but in the end we awarded the top ten points to Lord Sumption, on the grounds that his title combined gravitas with endless opportunities for puns on the common legal terms assumption and presumption, thus alleviating the tedium of life in chambers. The bottom ranking and one point goes to Lord Carwash of Notting Hill for his wholly inappropriate choice of title, no doubt the unfortunate result of a rogue auto-correct macro in the ancient word-processor used by the Privy Council.
Sternness of Countenance
A law lord has to look the part, with a grim, forbidding, and authoritarian aspect that will strike terror into those minded to try their tricks in court. Clear winner, therefore, is Lord Neuberger, while Baroness Hale’s entirely inappropriate smiley face gets nil points.
Gender
Eleven of the current law lords are men, each gaining a well-deserved ten points. Letting the side down is the Baroness Hale of Richmond, who gets the booby prize of one point.
Entertainment value
It’s not much fun being stuck in court while your legal team burns through your meagre savings at fifteen grand an hour, so at the very least you might hope for something worth reading at the end of it. We’ve looked through every judgement written by every one of the twelve current lords and ranked them for entertainment value. Bottom of the rankings is Lord ‘Lou’ Reed, whose dour, heavy-handed, tedious prose, and predictable judgements have a truly soporific quality. Best for deliberate humour is Lord Mance- you can picture a twinkle in his eye as you read his deliciously witty observations on case law. However, for out-and-out make-you-laugh fun one judge stands head and shoulders above the rest- Lord Toulson’s judgements are downright hilarious, with their gaffes and non-sequiturs. His misapplication of the principle of duum escheat in fifo demens had the office in stitches.
Verdict
The overall points show that our law lords are a pretty even set, with compensating strengths and weakness- a tribute to the selection process established by Professor Sushing in 2006- with all bar one gaining an impressive 40 points. The unsurprising exception is Baroness Hale who creeps home with just 20 points, suggesting there may be some validity for the universally held belief among the legal profession that law lords should be just that- lords.
November 10, 2015
This is not a book for reading at one sitting, but an ideal book to dip into occasionally. I have been dipping into this over the last couple of years and have now read every case described.
I first came across the Misleading Cases as a sitcom in the sixties. It would appear the collections are now long out of print but they do turn up second hand. (And apparently, all episodes of the sitcom have been wiped.)
The cases in this collection date from the twenties and thirties and the niceties of British law described are often now only of historic interest. The motor car was new, the wireless was new, it was illegal to sell tickets to the Irish Sweepstake. Many deal with the idiocies of English divorce law at the time. (As an MP, Herbert was instrumental in reforming the divorce laws. The final case in the book, although still funny, is a scathing description of how the law worked at the time.)
But, all in all, these cases are often very funny whilst giving a window of a world that has all but vanished.
I first came across the Misleading Cases as a sitcom in the sixties. It would appear the collections are now long out of print but they do turn up second hand. (And apparently, all episodes of the sitcom have been wiped.)
The cases in this collection date from the twenties and thirties and the niceties of British law described are often now only of historic interest. The motor car was new, the wireless was new, it was illegal to sell tickets to the Irish Sweepstake. Many deal with the idiocies of English divorce law at the time. (As an MP, Herbert was instrumental in reforming the divorce laws. The final case in the book, although still funny, is a scathing description of how the law worked at the time.)
But, all in all, these cases are often very funny whilst giving a window of a world that has all but vanished.
September 24, 2012
I watched Misleading Cases on TV as a child and thought it was hilarious; it was only later that I realised that A P Herbert was an important political figure. He was both a lawyer and a campaigning MP and was instrumental in getting a number of obsolete or silly laws changed: he can take a lot of the credit for updating the divorce laws, so that you didn't have to hire young ladies called Prudence and take them to Brighton for the weekend in order to get a divorce. His 'hero', Albert Haddock, also wages war against the Inland Revenue, who demand money with menaces; the local council of a seaside resort, who restrict the hours in which he is allowed to swim on a Sunday; and the police officer who arrests him for leading a cow through the streets of London.
Written in the 1920s and ’30s, these pieces are still a wonderful satire on the pettiness of the lawn and of government, both local and national – and make you feel that not a lot has changed.
Written in the 1920s and ’30s, these pieces are still a wonderful satire on the pettiness of the lawn and of government, both local and national – and make you feel that not a lot has changed.
September 19, 2016
Un libro comiquísimo y genial! Refleja prejuicios de la cultura británica de hace 90 años que no difieren a los prejuicios actuales en todo el mundo. Hay unos pequeños detalles sexista que mas vale tomarlos como comedia.
Contiene ideas muy interantes sobre la crítica literaria que a muchos usuarios de Goodreads, bookblogers, booktubers y bookstagramers les va a interesar.
Por supuesto, hay artículos un poco densos en tecnicismos legales y organizacionales británicos que pueden perfectamente ser obviados por los lectores menos inquisitivos.
Contiene ideas muy interantes sobre la crítica literaria que a muchos usuarios de Goodreads, bookblogers, booktubers y bookstagramers les va a interesar.
Por supuesto, hay artículos un poco densos en tecnicismos legales y organizacionales británicos que pueden perfectamente ser obviados por los lectores menos inquisitivos.
Read
July 19, 2009its a scream a great collection of bits and pieces of law. written by a lawyer and a crusader for changes in the law.
May 24, 2012
SHORT LEGAL FICTIONS-COURT ROOM LINGO-LEGAL HUMOR AT ITS BEST-
February 3, 2016
Read the book just for fun. I did find it amusing over all with some of the stories very amusing. English law of old could be quite convoluted. The book takes great joy in this fact.
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews