Reports of the death of the legal typo have been much exaggerated, if our readers are to be believed.

Georgie Godby of Cambridge recalls a high-tech example in a contract that was run through an autocorrect function. It read: ‘The manufacturer does not exclude or limit its liability for death or personal injury caused by its negligees.’

Audrey Rawlins of John Budd & Co in Blackpool has also discovered that computers have minds of their own. ‘In the days of word processors, I sent out a draft will, the last clause of which stated "I wish to be cremated". The client approved the draft and I asked for it to be engrossed. In the meantime, however, the word processor had had time to think. It clearly didn’t fancy the idea of cremation (and who can blame it?), and in the engrossment declared triumphantly "I wish to be created!"’

Back to old technology. District Judge Graeme Smith of Manchester says he once received advice from counsel stating that a term would be implied into the contract by the ‘vicious bystander’ test, rather than the ‘officious bystander’.

Beverley Gullon of EAD Solicitors recalls some classics from her speciality of occupational disease. ‘A type of hearing test called evoked response audiometry was typed as "evoked response or geometry". In a letter to the widow of the injured party, when I was trying to piece together a claim where the injured party had died before I had obtained a medical report, I had said that I wanted to prove her husband’s deafness was caused by exposure to excessive noise but it came back: "Your husband’s death was caused by exposure to excessive noise." A consultant, Mr Forsey, came back as Mr 4C.’

That’s quite enough. For now.