This is such a wonderful read. Lots of good parts, but one of my favorites is this:

Could they have a ‘meeting of the minds’? Of course not, no more than handing a document to a sheep and saying “By not repudiating this agreement, I may eat you.” establishes a mutual and common intent.

Section 5, Analysis, was a good read. I especially like this comment from the judge.

The fact that a letter is sent to the bank, registered or otherwise, demanding that the bank prove its claim in a specific way, does not oblige them to do that. He might just as well have asked the bank officers to dress in some specific costume and march down the street, if in fact the debts were owed. It does not mean they are required to do it.

That was quite a read. Do the other sovcits ever take the time to analyse these judgements and explain what went wrong? I'd love to know what their explaination for the jydge tossing all their arguments is, but I'm not sure I can risk my remaining brain cells to dig into their communities myself.