Talk:Sharp practice

Canada: Law Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian law.

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.

Hmmm

With great respect to the Courts of Ontario, the use of two minor and very recent century cases to suggest that "sharp practice" has an established legal meaning is a bit suspect. The concept is much older than that: the OED says: "Sharp practice. 1847 2.a. Hard bargaining; relentless pursuit of advantage. b. Dishonourable taking of advantage, trickery." I found the phrase in the dictionary at Law.com, but not in Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law at FindLaw.com, but just because there's a dictionary definition doesn't necessarily mean there should be a Wikipedia article on the subject (sorry Colonel W!). - Pointillist (talk) 13:40, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The topic commonly occurs in the context of the professional ethics of the legal profession. For example, see this source. It has good relevance here on Wikipedia too, I fancy. :) Colonel Warden (talk) 13:53, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okaaaaaayy (not entirely convinced), but well-established legal concepts (e.g. mutual mistake) and even probably dubious ones (like promissory estoppel) generally have better sources and examples than these. It might need someone who's a current practioner/student with LexisNexis access to improve this, e.g. from Category:Wikipedian lawyers, Category:Wikipedian law students, Category:Wikipedians interested in law or just Category:Wikipedians with law degrees (like me :-). - Pointillist (talk) 22:50, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Canadian?

As a Brit, it seems odd that the article implies that sharp practice is a Canadian concept and term. While I don't doubt that it's in use in Canada, it's a longstanding British English term which is very widely used throughout the English speaking world, though I'm not sure if it's in common use in the US. --Ef80 (talk) 15:59, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]