bad iwr bad!!!
still u always seem to pull it off, so r.e.s.p.e.c.t.
if u're looking for a couple of really good articles that canvas most of the issues nicely (and avoid u having to go too deep into it all) there's the tilbury one u've already got, the burrows one i mentioned in my post (u'll find it through mac journal finder) as well as 'the fusion fallacy revisited' fiona burns bond law review, plus there's a 'suggested answer' to a fusion question in 'the nature of equity and the law of trusts' u'll find if u google it which summarises the issues quite nicely (though is more focussed on english law than australian). if u need to get 2500 words out under the gun u can borrow my original structure if u like - it looked at pre-judicature law and equity (brief thing on evolution and rationales), then the judicature act, the fusion fallacy and i elaborated from there. it's not a bad structure for eating up words - i ended up chucking it in favour of direct/indirect fusion and trying to incorporate (by implication) some of those things (not sure how they'll feel about that) cause i needed the extra words, but if i needed to get that many words out in two days i'd probably have used it (far less finicky than pedantic case analysis, dissection of the ff theory so i can support it while crapping on it etc). just some thoughts.
