We've shown various rebus before - usually French and from the decades either side of 1900.
Here is one received today from the protesting residents of the Victorian town Tecoma.
detail
A Person Looks At A Work Of Art/
someone looks at something ...
LOGOS/HA HA
No Legal Rights Without Equal Legal Representation?
This is an issue that has us thinking again about un/equal representation before the Law.
In this case, MacDonald's sought planning permission from the local Council to build a MacDonald's restaurant in Tecoma, opposite a kindergarten. The Council ruled against this.
MacDonald's, with a team of top lawyers, then took the Council to VCAT. VCAT ruled against the Council.
Prohibitive further legal costs meant that the Council could not take the case further. The locals began their on-site protests.
MacDonalds then brought THEIR full force of the Law down upon the protestors... this from Crikey :
The writ states that McDonald’s, which makes $5 billion a year globally, will seek unspecified damages and costs and wide-ranging injunctions against the protesters either remaining on or entering the site and using social media to prosecute their campaign.
Four of the eight fronted the Victorian Supreme Court this morning and heard that McDonald’s blue-chip law firm Norton Rose Fulbright would seek to make one protester, Janine Watson, “representative” of the roof dwellers while the seventh defendant, Marcia Stewart, would represent protesters blocking access to the construction site. This would allow the court to place blanket notices at Tecoma to ward off all dissenters without having to specify the names of individuals...
Read full article at :
Revealed: the full McDonald’s Tecoma writs and affidavits
