The Blip Blop Blog (Team Entity)

Food security is defined as the ability of a nation, to provide adequate food for its citizens and food insecurity loosely translated means the inability of a nation to provide food for its citizens. The ability of a nation to provide sufficient food for its population may be restricted by both internal and external factors for example political instability or other factors that may be beyond its control like the weather and unexpected changes in the climate that lead to crops failing and as a result there is a lack of food or there is insufficient food to go around. The food that is available must also be nutritious and to some degree able to fulfill the dietary requirements of an average person as opposed to food that while it may fill the belly has little or no dietary significance for example a ton of candy bars.  A food secure nation is by definition a nation that has enough food that is readily available and that food is not only accessible but also affordabl

    Copyright © 2020 by Dyarne Jessica Ward

Copyright © 2020 by Dyarne Jessica Ward and Kathiresan Ramachanderam

    Copyright © 2020 by Dyarne Jessica Ward and Kathiresan Ramachanderam

  Copyright © 2020 by Dyarne Ward and Kathiresan Ramachanderam        

The origins of the law of equity date back to the period just after the Norman conquest of England in 1066. Prior to that the only law that existed, as far as the courts were concerned, was common law, and it strictly adhered to the principle of Stare Decisis, a Roman legacy which established the system of judicial precedent which is based on the principle that like cases should be decided in like manner. Strict adherence to the doctrine however deprived the law of any sort of flexibility, and it resulted in some unfair decisions, and equity, which in the normal sense of the word means fairness, stepped in to mitigate the harshness and the rigidity of the common law system and to make the law more flexible. Litigants who were denied justice started petitioning the king and the king would hear their pleas and make a decision based on his conscious, setting aside the common law, if he had to, in that particular instance. Equitable decisions do not create a binding precedent.

17) Equity is a shield and not a sword. As per the maxim equity is a defensive mechanism and not an offensive mechanism and an applicant seeks an equitable remedy when the applicant is deprived of something the applicant is genuinely entitled to and not otherwise for example when the doctrine of promissory estoppel is invoked. According to the doctrine, when one party makes a promise to another party and the second party relies on the promise and acts to his or her detriment than that promise is a valid promise and is a promise that is enforceable at law. Copyright © 2019 by Dyarne Jessica Ward

16) Equity will not perfect an imperfect gift. With regards to gifts unless some form of consideration has been given equity will not intervene or compel the donor or his estate to make good on a gratuitous promise. There are however certain exceptions to this maxim for example the rule in Strong v Bird (1874) – where the donor intends to pass his property to another and maintains that intention until his death but for some reason or other fails to make the transfer during his lifetime, the property becomes vested in the intended donee as the donor’s executor, and the vesting of the property is deemed to be or is seen as completing the gift. Copyright © 2019 by Dyarne Jessica Ward

The Othello Syndrome takes its name after the Shakespearean play Othello where Othello kills his beautiful wife Desdemona because he believed that she was unfaithful. In the play Desdemona never cheats on Othello but he thinks that she has and he murders her. The phrase in modern day crime is used in reference to husbands and male partners who kill their wives or partners, often in a fit of rage, because they believe them to be either unfaithful or disloyal. Does the Othello Syndrome differ from a crime of passion? The answer in short is yes. In a crime of passion the accused can kill either his or her spouse or his or her partner or the person that he or she is with. Both men and women can commit a crime of passion. The case of R v Cunningham (1981) tells us that the accused can claim that he or she committed a crime of passion in the hope of mitigating the crime or being given a lesser sentence. The defense, not that it is a recognized defense in the normal sense of th