A longstanding legal dispute between Sod’s law and Parkinson’s law was no closer to resolution last night after a widely anticipated ruling by the High Court was postponed when the judge presiding over the case was injured in a freak accident attempting to get to court on time. Lawyers in favour of Sod’s Law have described the delay as ‘bloody typical,’ while advocates of Parkinson’s Law welcomed an extension to proceedings which they have criticised throughout for being ‘unduly rushed’.
The dispute began when barristers invoking Parkinson’s law, (which states that work expands to fill the time available), challenged the assertion laid down in Sod’s Law that if something can go wrong it will. ‘The unplanned calamities stipulated by the defendant’s doctrine were causing many tasks to overrun’ claimed one barrister, ‘violating the central edict of Parkinson’s law and rendering the two codes incompatible.’ Evidence cited in the case showed that students were particularly likely to be victims of the clash between these jurisdictions, with many of them taking the full two weeks to complete an essay and then losing the un-backed-up file on their laptops the moment they attempted to print it out.
Lawyers for Parkinson’s law have also argued that the influence of Sod’s Law increases disproportionately the closer a project gets to its deadline. ‘It’s much worse for things to go wrong at the last minute, so that’s inevitably when they do’ claimed one witness. ‘If it wasn’t for Parkinson’s Law, we would have time to correct any mistakes or maybe even start again.’
Both parties will now have to wait for a ruling at a date to be determined after Lord Justice Collins’ unfortunate accident, which requires extensive hip and knee surgery. Doctors did not want to put a date on when Lord Collins might have finished his course of treatment, especially after they operated on the wrong ‘Lord Collins’ last thing on Friday afternoon.