On Mon, 12 May 2008, Ian Kelly wrote: > When an applicable question on equation in an equity case has a > judgement, and has had that judgement continuously for the past > week (or all parties to the contract have approved that > judgement), the judgement is in effect as a binding agreement > between the parties. In this role it is subject to modification > or termination by the usual processes governing binding > agreements.
I see, I wondered. Looks like the only thing to do is overturn, which actually replaces the judgment (and therefore contract, since contract=judgement) with a new judgement. I think that creates a genuine conflict between R911, which says the new judgement replaces the old one, and R2169 saying the original one is in effect. In this case, R911 would win. Hmm, and it looks like the replacement can't be appealed, no matter how inequitable. hmm. -Goethe
