Student With Two Assignments Due Tomorrow Decides to Play Wordle for First Time Since 2022

Third year law student Connie Ections has shared an insightful take away from her experiences cramming the Property Law assignment this week. 

Although her group is admittedly just now starting the assignment they very likely should have started weeks ago, Connie has turned her mind to more important matters.

She simply couldn’t resist the soft whispers of today’s Wordle, New York Times’ famous word-game.

“I mean, yeah, I do have an assignment to work on, but … I don’t know, the Wordle is just so enticing … please don’t tell my assignment… I’m ashamed enough already.”

Connie’s team members, Mini Word-Cross and Bea Spelling have expressed concerns over Mini’s secret Wordle affair.

Mini claims that Connie has started awkwardly hiding her laptop screen during their study sessions.

“I can see her typing and she looks like she is thinking critically but I don’t see the Anonymous Quokka writing on the Google Doc… plus I don’t think there’s anything THAT exciting about Retail Leases.”

While her team is in a pinch, Connie is trying the word “PINCH” as her third guess. 

Three grey, two yellow: “I guess I haven’t played any NYT Games since last exam block, maybe I’ve lost my mojo,” admits Connie.

Needless to say, it is not looking promising for Connie’s Wordle nor her sentiment review.

(Two guesses) more to come.

Opinion: Only thing worse than not getting clerkship interview is getting clerkship interview

For fourth year law student Laura Port, every application brought forth a sense of impending doom no matter the outcome.

A rejection meant she had to come to terms with failure, that all her hours spent on cover letters and psychometric pseudoscience were for nothing.

But an acceptance, that was something else indeed.

Further interview prep, a cocktail evening that you can’t enjoy because it’s secretly another interview in disguise, the risk of seeing the HR rep randomly on the street sometime in the next 18 months and realising that your whole life is henceforth just a long interview where you will never not be judged.

The reward if it all succeeded: a month-long stress intensive with an ever-decreasing chance of retention, all for a grad offer with no guarantee of long-term retention, all for the opportunity to defend consulting firms that blacklist whistleblowers.

It wasn’t exactly the noble human-rights-affirming social-justice-seeking lifestyle Laura envisaged when she filled in QTAC four years ago.

(Un)fortunately, due to her impressive co-curricular resume writing for the Obiter, a 6.7 GPA, and a healthy dose of nominative determinism, Laura Port had accidentally landed no fewer than eleven interviews, all of which had to be scheduled within a week.

Maybe there’s still time to drop the law half of her degree and graduate with straight arts. An Ancient Greek major is definitely just as employable as law, right?

(Seven interviews) more to come

Local Law Student Uses IRAC to Decide Whether to Break Up With Her Boyfriend

Fourteen months old, the world’s greatest, most romantic and closest relationship ever (according to Bethany) has encountered unexpected difficulties as of late. The movie nights just aren’t hitting the same, the communication is breaking down as much as the world’s climate, and David is constantly ‘busy at work’ nowadays on Friday nights. Sooner or later Bethany would need to make a decision. A decision so complicated that she would have to use a problem-solving method used for the toughest legal disputes.

Issue, rule, application, conclusion. Creating the beloved acronym IRAC. The structure Bethany so dearly loves using. And judging by her marks last semester, a structure Bethany needs more practice using. It was perfect for this ‘legal’ problem.

‘The issue is whether the current status of my relationship with David satisfies the conditions needed for a breakup’, wrote Bethany, happy with the verbose sentence to pick up on any additional marks.

‘The rule is that the issue in the relationship must not be able to be resolved with working things out, as established by Indigo v Harry. If the issue or multiple issues – such as the passion in a relationship being unable to be reignited or the partner being as loyal as a certain “high-profile Queensland man” – are unable to be resolved, then not ending the relationship soon suggests you are a coward (Jessica v Dylan).’ That was one of Bethany’s best paragraphs in law school yet.

For the application section, she wrote ‘Unlike in Indigo v Harry, where Harry was willing to work through any relationship issues with Indigo, David is as unwilling to negotiate for any compromise as a certain US president. As the chemistry with David has officially reached the level of a D-tier 1970s romcom, Jessica v Dylan suggests that the time to end the relationship is now’.

Now for the conclusion to a rigorous problem. ‘It is thus likely that the relationship will be considered to be in the “we need to talk” stage’.

The work was done. The topic of ending ‘the world’s greatest, most romantic and closest relationship ever’ was somehow less emotionally damaging than the average law school exam.

No more to come.

2025 Brainrot on Latest List of Phrases Banned by Crisafulli Government

Following his implementation of “strong, decisive” measures against hate speech, David Crisafulli has taken it upon himself to piss off even more of Queensland’s youth, announcing a blanket ban on the phrases “Tung Tung Tung Sahur” and “67”. 

Citing concerns to do with Tung Tung Tung Sahur’s “divisive, Muslim roots” as well as the “ability of ‘67’ to foster intergenerational, global connections,” Crisafulli announced at a press conference this morning that the public display of these phrases— staples of Gen Alpha culture— would be criminalised by the beginning of next year. 

“It’s just too dangerous,” said Crisafulli. “Next thing you know, Queenslanders might actually realise that the cultural lexicon we access on a day-to-day basis is founded in our shared humanity and mutual understanding. This is a major threat to our community, and there is nothing more important to me than keeping Queenslanders safe.” He then dismissed any further questions from gathered journalists and proceeded to spend an hour explaining why powering AI data centres with natural gas would make Queensland great again. 

To get a true reflection of what Gen Alpha Queenslanders had to say about the ban, The Obiter conducted several vox pops in the play area located on Level 2 of Westfield Mount Gravatt.  

“67 is actually really dead,” said Sally Knowles, aged 9. “No one does it anymore because all the teachers got to it.” After a moment’s reflection, she added, “But I will miss Tung Tung Tung Sahur. Can they really just ban us from saying his name?”

Upon learning that the gesture of 67 would remain unscathed, Connor Thorne, aged 8, proclaimed that he would “continue to do what he was already doing.” “I don’t like listening to my dad when he tells me what to do,” he said. “So I don’t care if this guy says I can’t say it. I’m going to say it anyway. 67 67 67 67 67.” 

Whether Crisafulli intends to punish these young offenders under his Adult Crime, Adult Time policy remains unknown. If he follows through, every brainrotted Gen Alpha— or the occasional millennial lurker on r/fellowkids— may be subject to a maximum penalty of six months’ imprisonment. 

The Obiter will continue to investigate. 

Law Library Seats Found in Breach of Duty of Care, Students Allege

In a decision that has sent shockwaves through the reading room, students studying in the law library have alleged that the seating has fallen well below the standard of a reasonable chair, in flagrant breach of its basic duty of care.

"The foreseeability of harm was obvious," said second-year student and repeat sufferer Mia Backhurst, gesturing at a chair she described as "more of a torture apparatus than a place to sit." "I've basically run the Bolam test in my head. No reasonable seat manufacturer would do this to a person."

The alleged breach centres on a design so uncomfortable that several students report losing feeling in their lower body somewhere between the second and third hour of a single sitting, a phenomenon one student has taken to calling "constructive numbness."

"I was reading a case about causation and honestly I couldn't tell if the pain radiating down my leg was sciatica or just, like, vibes," said fourth-year student Tom Ashcroft. "Either way, I think I've suffered actionable damage."

Library staff have denied any wrongdoing, maintaining that the seats meet the relevant standard of care "for a chair, not a spa."

"We assessed the risk and considered it reasonable in the circumstances," said Head Librarian Deborah Finch, who was reportedly unable to make eye contact while standing near the offending furniture. "Also, have you seen our budget?"

Some students have gone further, arguing the library owed them a non-delegable duty given the "special relationship" created by mandatory attendance during exam period, and are said to be exploring remedies including specific performance, in the form of a cushion.

At time of publication, the library had not confirmed whether it intended to defend the claim, settle out of court, or simply replace the seats before Obiter finds out who upholstered them.

Judgment reserved.

BREAKING: The Obiter returns after Law Revue hiatus

After 8 months of hardcore preparation, the highly anticipated annual Law Revue finished on a high.

“Oh man, you totally have to watch it,” Kaw Ktudent (19) had told her two friends– one a sports physio major, the other studying compsci and maths.

“Are you aware we don't know shit about law? Do you seriously have zero friends? What do you even do?” they asked.

Kaw personally took offence to this. It took a lot of grip strength to show up for 1 night and  lift chairs backstage.

Luckily, they enjoyed everything regardless. In fact, they reported seeing her moving a couple tables, claiming that she “totally stole the show”.

After the final night, however, they had a burning question.

“Kaw, it's so amazing how you're getting involved in your first year. What happened to that article thing you were plugging us to like on Facebook, though?”

“Awh yeah, it's totally been active. We're just holding back right now.” Kaw replied.

She did not have the guts to tell them that the last Facebook messenger chat was 16 weeks ago.

Whoops.

Regardless, Kaw reassured them that the articles would be “at some point,” and told them to keep an eye out for their Facebook FYPs.

“You guys don’t get it. Facebook is the new Instagram, I swear.”

Students Seen Crying in the Law Library After Missing First Law Ball Ticketing Round

6:58

A nervous atmosphere fills the room.

Baw Btudent (18) is a first year starting at UQ law, confident that she’ll snatch tickets for the law ball. 

“It’s probably going to be fine,” she claimed, 

“I’ve ticketed for BTS before.”

She shudders at the memory of it. Her fingers aching from typing so aggressively, the 67 tabs open, the angry swearing at classmates to “shut the fuck up or I won’t get to see Jimin IRL.”

Did she mention that this was in the middle of her year 12 chemistry class? Maybe that’s why she flunked her external.

She briefly calculates the demand-ratio between that concert and the law ball. Probably around 75,000-200 respectively. Unluckily for Baw, she’s a law student and can’t do basic maths.

6:59.

‘It’s going to be okay,’ she tells herself. She could manage to secure BTS tickets in two minutes. Surely no one in law is that desperate to go to a ball. Surely, they’re all doing their weekly 500 pages of cases (that she gave up doing after the first week of the semester).

Surely, the tickets will take at least ten minutes to sell out. She assumes that that’s what the fourth year meant at market day when she told her “Tickets usually sell out in minutes” with a dire tone.

7:00. Its time.

Her eyes focus on all 69 tabs like a pro. Her fingers move faster than the speed of light. No one can beat her. She’s a ticketing pr---

7:00:15.

Silence.

A shudder trickles down her spine.

The words “fully reserved” stare back at her.

“There’s no way.” She mumbles to herself.

“There’s no way that I, Baw Btudent, failed at ticketing.”

She crumbles to the ground, distraught. She now not only has to pay an extra 10 bucks (given that she even gets tickets at all), but also can’t brag to all her peers that stanning BTS has given her many valuable life skills.

The worst part is, she can’t even go on a totally-legal website and negotiate until the ticket is 10 dollars. Or maybe she can.

$10 more to come tomorrow

Posse of Normally-Dressed Spectators Causes Chaos at Clowncil Question Time

The City Clowncil sitting week started off with a bang (or, rather, with a silent ‘pop!’ flag unfurling from a pistol).

As Question Time progressed - bringing reports on new unicycle lanes, juggling programs for the unemployed, and the Brisbane Metro - an unwelcome presence in the visitors’ gallery drew murmurs from the Clowncil benches.

A group of spectators, hair undyed, faces unpainted, dressed to the nines in business casual, seated silently with their notepads drawn.

“I see the party police have decided to join us!” crowed Lord Mayor Boingo McChuckles, as a chorus of honking noses built to a crescendo.

“Why don’t you go put on your regular-sized shoes and skedaddle!”

Security eventually shooed the spectators out of the chamber (by way of water-squirting flower).

Confronted about the incident as the Clowncillors piled into their one tiny car at the end of the day, Cr Pogo Bogo commented: “I’m all for public acclowntability, and my temper’s usually as long as this handkerchief [said as she pulled one from her sleeve].”

“But you know what they say… the show must go on.”

Cr Pierrot le Mime declined to comment, but offered a heartstring-pulling performance depicting his existential feelings of imprisonment in a box of his own making.

Spokespeople for the observers, the disappointingly named Lucy Nicholls and Tom Carmody, remain undeterred in their quest for transparency.

“The people of Brisbane want answers. We are done saying, ‘Not my circus, not my monkeys.’”

More to come.

GPS Debaters Suddenly Social Justice Warriors When Paired Against Girls’ School

Following a dominant GPS season, where the irrelevancy of issues like human rights went uncontested, the Churchie 10.7s have made a philosophical about-turn after being drawn against a girls’ school in round one of QDU.

“We did some exercises in basic human empathy,” explained their coach, “now I just have to hope they don’t absolutely cook this short prep with the most cursed takes imaginable.”

Sometimes, it turns out, not trying is better than getting it wrong.

“If I were a single mother, who was also queer and a person of colour and suffered from a disability and was a refugee; I would support the affirmative team” first speaker and future school captain Alex Alexson waxed lyrically, in a totally unbelievable attempt to gain the sympathy of the room.

“You’d have to be a bigot to disagree,” third affirmative speaker and local bigot Sam Sommerton alleged, turning round to look at the girls on the opposing bench.

In the post-debate press conference, the girls on the negative team were more than a little confused.

“The topic was about whether sports teams should be held responsible for the behaviour of their fans,” second negative speaker Holly Smith, “I truly have no clue what they was yapping about.”

“Their third speaker tried to say they understood the burden of sexism because they had mothers and sister,” added the third negative speaker Lucy Speakgood, “did they not realise that we are literally women ourselves?”

The boys now eagerly awaits the adjudication, which pundits expect will result in a loss by about 50 thousand points.

More to come.

Former High School Debater Isn’t Cramming – They’re Just Practicing “Short Prep”

With a Foundations of Law assignment due at 3pm, most of the first-year law cohort was stressing out, refining their meticulously crafted essays and desperately editing their footnotes to be comma-perfect. But for former high school debating legend Albert Rimmington, this day couldn’t have been more chill.

“I’ve been preparing for this my whole life,” Albert claimed, “it’s basically just a short preparation debate, but a law essay instead of a topic about whether we should ban school uniforms.”

Albert’s classmates were intrigued at how he would manage to write a 2000-word assignment in only an hour, but Albert’s insistence that his faultless silent brainstorming technique would maximise efficiency assuaged their fears.

When asked what sources he would use to justify his position, Albert said “I’ll just BS it to be honest. That’s what worked when we won the 11.4 premiership. It’s not like examples and sources really matter much when the adjudicator doesn’t know if it’s real or not.”

“I’m not an ‘adjudicator’, I’m a career expert in constitutional law.” lamented seminar leader Stohn Muart-Jill.

Albert defended his take by suggesting “what if the negative team just asserts another fake statistic back?”

“That isn’t how this works,” responded Stohn, “hopefully Albert will learn when he gets his mark back”.

Four (if not even lower) to come.