Francis Bennion portrait

Home

Human Rights

Law

Politics & Government

Professionalism

Sexual Ethics

Religion & Belief

Poetry Fiction Drama Other

About FB

Google

www this site

SITEMAP

 

ALL FB's WRITINGS

 

ABOUT FB

. . CV

. . Autobiographical

. . Life photos

 

FIFTH EDITION 2008

. . Overview

. . Updating

. . Index to book

. . Corrigenda

 

FB's WRITING

. . Chronological

. . Topics

. . Books

. . Articles etc.

. . Press letters

. . Blogs

. . Acts of Parliament

. . People mentioned

. . Archive

 

OTHER MATERIAL

. . Non-FB writings

. . Press cuttings

. . Reviews

. . Comments

. . Documents

. . All photos

. . Audio and video

 

Abbreviations

Contact FB

Contact Webmaster

 

Copyright

Disclaimer

 

Acrobat reader
     

Article in New Law Journal

 

149 NLJ (1999) 1068.

pdf version Doc. No. 1999.NFB.001

 

III

 

Letter by Professor Paul Dobson in New Law Journal (1999)

on the Consumer Credit Act 1974 s.18

 

Dear Madam,

 

The article by Iain MacDonald QC ‘What’s the Story with multiple agreements?’ (149 NLJ (1999) 962) made interesting reading, dealing as it did with the unusual circumstances of a recent Court of Appeal decision on multiple agreements under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. Mr MacDonald referred to an article on this topic by Francis Bennion [1999] C.I.C.C 1 which was published last February in Consumer Credit Control, a loose leaf reference work. This work was originally written by Francis Bennion, the draftsman of the 1974 Act, and first published in 1976. Since 1987 it has been edited by me. During the 23 years since it was first published it has been updated by releases issued twice a year.

 

Francis Bennion’s article addresses a number of the issues discussed in Story. It is possible that if in Story the court had considered the arguments advanced in that article, the court would not have found them persuasive. It is a shame, however, that in a judgment delivered in May, the court was, it seems, left unaware of the existence of these arguments put forward in an article published in February and for many years set out, albeit less fully, in the text of our loose leaf work.

 

One wonders why these authorities were not, if (as it appears) they were not, drawn to the attention of the court. It is strange that Consumer Credit Control, together with the Consumer Credit Law Reports included in that work, is apparently, after 23 years, still not known to some practitioners in the consumer credit field. Perhaps this letter will alert them.