Talk:Benjamin Boothby

Untitled

Perhaps a little more nuance and particularity - in part respect to Justice Boothby. THe man was neither a fool, nor uneducated in the law. So if he had a legal view, it had a basis, and if the remedy for the defects which he found was Imperial legislation changing the ground rules, then he was a man of principle and foresight. "confirming the authority of the colonial Parliament to pass legislation different from that passed by the Imperial Parliament" - the Colonial laws validity Act did no such thing - in fact it preserved the situation that clolonial laws were void where they were in conflict with Imperial legislation - a situation which was not to change until the enactment of the statute of Westminster.Suastiastu (talk) 10:51, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Article concerns and classification

• Reassess the article to C-class.

Fails the B-class criteria #1, The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations. It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited, and #2, The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies.

The "Family" section has many unsourced entries, and in the "South Australia" subsection there is unsourced content: "This was the last appointment of a South Australian judge by the Colonial Office" and "Boothby, in a series of judgments, adopted a pedantic approach to Imperial Law, holding a number of South Australian statutes invalid, including those which introduced the Torrens system of land registration in the colony." -- Otr500 (talk) 08:10, 21 December 2025 (UTC)