Matthew's Journal

In an ideal world: no. Then again, in an ideal world, the issue wouldn't come up.

If:

a) Signing a contract was a much rarer event than it is,
b) Contracts were more clearly written, and things that were likely to be contentious were seperated from all of the boring motherhood-and-apple-pie stuff, and
c) Contracts were made available in advance for your perusal so that you (or experts acting on your behalf) could examine them *before* going through all of the hassle of applying for something,

and consequently,

d) this actually meant that people were much less willing to try and slip crap terms into contracts than they are currently,

then I'd be a lot happier for "fair" to be decided as "what was agreed at the time the contract was signed" rather than a much broader notion that encompasses social attitudes, legislation and legal precedent.