Sir Edward James Holman, born 1947, of the High Court of England and Wales, recently had this much to say in a divorce proceeding :

I have to say that I do not find it very ediffying that people in this financial bracket should be taking up a day of court time over a sum which to them, though not to others, is objectively so small. However, agreement has not been reached and I must rule.

Leaving aside the solipsistic spelling style bestowed on the otherwise innocent word "edifying", as well as a certain unfamiliarity with its meaning apparent from context¹ ; and also leaving aside the ridiculous happenstance whereby the justice out of his own free will & ineptitude published matter into the public record (a right which he has), after which out of his own delusional ignorance decided he may proceed to take it back (a right which he neither has nor could possibly acquire) – this declaration also annuls previously good law in England and Wales, specifically Article 6(1) of the ECHR :

In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.

Apparently in the newly constructed Ingsoc Republic, successor state of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland after the latter's dissolution of its compact with the other states forming the European Union, the fundamental right of access to a fair trial by an impartial tribunal no longer applies ; instead an obscure system of quotas based on the petitioner's total wealth is to be employed.

In this novel and as of yet not fully documented approach to legal matters, a subject's total wealth – be it a pound or a billion pounds – entitles him to a fixed amount of court time. On that basis, the fractions of that wealth entitle him to fractions of that unit time, so a man who sues to recover a million when his total wealth is two million has better standing than a man who sues to recover a million when his total wealth is ten million.

It is perfectly understandable that Mr. Justice Holman has serious trouble foreseeing the necessary results of that naive policy ; but then again he also has serious trouble comprehending the apparently intricate workings of publication as a one way street; or for that matter the correct English spelling of reasonably common words.

With such great men, what need has England of any sheeps?

1. Edifying is that which informs in a dispositive manner. ↩