Talk:The Moorcock

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Transport: Maritime

	Transport portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Transport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TransportWikipedia:WikiProject TransportTemplate:WikiProject TransportTransport articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Maritime task force (assessed as Low-importance).

The content of the implied term[edit]

The page currently states: The Court held for the ship owner, ruling that there was an implied term that the wharfingers had taken reasonable steps to ascertain the state of the riverbed adjacent to the jetty (not, as often stated, an implied term that the jetty would be a safe place to dock).

Whilst true, the point in brackets seems a little pedantic; the case effectively DOES mean that the wharf-owners had given an implied term that the jetty would be a safe place to dock. I suggest that the text be amended. Arrivisto (talk) 16:17, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed this is not a book to discuss what some academics and jurists have misquoted it as in various guises throughout the centuries.- Adam37 Talk 11:01, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]