dinny_g wrote: ↑Tue Sep 24, 2019 11:29 am
Jobbo wrote: ↑Tue Sep 24, 2019 11:26 am
ETA: Dinny, GG gives you no grounds to make that inference. The two words mean the same thing: not in accordance with the law.
Noted - I'm keeping score. Although I'm not sure I'm qualified. At the moment I have Jobbo 2 goals ahead with a point bonus try and 50 overs left...
So if Jobbo got done for drink driving he would say im driving "not in accordance with the law"? No, you would be committing a specific offence of driving under the influence and no person in reality would say I was driving unlawfully rather than "I committed an illegal act".
I guess you can think of it as 'positive' versus 'negative' legality. The consequences which flow from it are generally different. An unlawful act can be quashed or set aside (hence why it is used in the area of administrative law and judicial review) and an illegal act will generally have a prescribed punishment as a result of committing it.
You can conflate the two but in front of a court, you'd just look like a fool.