Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Options

Injunction Hearing Sept 1st

2»

Comments

  • Options
    He does seem to have made a precedent in electronic email signatures. 

    We have seen an example of this being questioned in the last week or so....... 

    https://www.clarkewillmott.com/news/email-signatures/
  • Options
    Cafc43v3r said:
    These people used to stand on the Strand ranting about these things 
  • Options
    Rothko said:
    Cafc43v3r said:
    These people used to stand on the Strand ranting about these things 
    There are some very strange people out there in the world.

    Can you get away with calling a judged "crooked" just because a case has gone against you?
  • Options
    Off_it said:
    Rothko said:
    Cafc43v3r said:
    These people used to stand on the Strand ranting about these things 
    There are some very strange people out there in the world.

    Can you get away with calling a judged "crooked" just because a case has gone against you?
    Blimey! Not sure what to think about their criticism of Judge Pearce. Do his past actions suggest that he might disregard a strong case in a way that we get the wrong decision? If so, I guess the key question is who has the strongest case; Elliott or Panorame? Maybe he will sit on the fence and defer to someone else to make the decision at a future stage of the court process. So many questions........
  • Options

    manchester.chancery@justice.gov.uk

    Reference: BL-2020-MAN-000077

    I've also now sent an email request and got the automated reply. Guess I won't get another reply until Tuesday, just hope I haven't left it too late.
    You probably havent... I think people were messaging on the morning of the last hearing and were getting quick responses to gain access
    You're right, just received the second email with a promise of an invitation just before 2:00 pm on Tuesday. 

    Guess justice doesn't take bank holidays!
  • Options

    manchester.chancery@justice.gov.uk

    Reference: BL-2020-MAN-000077

    I've also now sent an email request and got the automated reply. Guess I won't get another reply until Tuesday, just hope I haven't left it too late.
    You probably havent... I think people were messaging on the morning of the last hearing and were getting quick responses to gain access
    You're right, just received the second email with a promise of an invitation just before 2:00 pm on Tuesday. 

    Guess justice doesn't take bank holidays!
    Just received mine as well !!

  • Options
    edited August 2020
    I will be keeping an eye on the match thread!

    But I really don't think it will go ahead and my money is on Elliot withdrawing the claim.

    1/3 Withdrawn
    5/2 Goes ahead

    If TS, advised by Freshfields, believes it is not an issue then I would trust their judgement over the lawyers advising Elliot.

    It is purely a game of poker and to see who blinks first.
  • Options
    meldrew66 said:
    Off_it said:
    Rothko said:
    Cafc43v3r said:
    These people used to stand on the Strand ranting about these things 
    There are some very strange people out there in the world.

    Can you get away with calling a judged "crooked" just because a case has gone against you?
    Blimey! Not sure what to think about their criticism of Judge Pearce. Do his past actions suggest that he might disregard a strong case in a way that we get the wrong decision? If so, I guess the key question is who has the strongest case; Elliott or Panorame? Maybe he will sit on the fence and defer to someone else to make the decision at a future stage of the court process. So many questions........

    I really wouldn't worry about it. To summarise, the bloke criticising the judge did a U-turn on a motorway slip road, and got caught doing it by the police. The police began a prosecution, but didn't see it through, because there was uncertainty about whether or not the bloke turned before the point on the slip road at which the motorway regulations kicked in. Despite nothing coming of the prosecution, he complained to Cheshire Constabulary, the Independent Office of Police Conduct, his Police and Crime Commissioner and his MP. He also sued the police for malicious prosecution, and chose to represent himself (this was the case heard by Judge Pearce). When that went against him, he appealed, again representing himself. He lost the appeal. At some point, he created the website Cafc43v3r linked to, on which he labels everyone involved in the matter as either a criminal or a crook.
  • Options
    Gillis said:
    meldrew66 said:
    Off_it said:
    Rothko said:
    Cafc43v3r said:
    These people used to stand on the Strand ranting about these things 
    There are some very strange people out there in the world.

    Can you get away with calling a judged "crooked" just because a case has gone against you?
    Blimey! Not sure what to think about their criticism of Judge Pearce. Do his past actions suggest that he might disregard a strong case in a way that we get the wrong decision? If so, I guess the key question is who has the strongest case; Elliott or Panorame? Maybe he will sit on the fence and defer to someone else to make the decision at a future stage of the court process. So many questions........

    I really wouldn't worry about it. To summarise, the bloke criticising the judge did a U-turn on a motorway slip road, and got caught doing it by the police. The police began a prosecution, but didn't see it through, because there was uncertainty about whether or not the bloke turned before the point on the slip road at which the motorway regulations kicked in. Despite nothing coming of the prosecution, he complained to Cheshire Constabulary, the Independent Office of Police Conduct, his Police and Crime Commissioner and his MP. He also sued the police for malicious prosecution, and chose to represent himself (this was the case heard by Judge Pearce). When that went against him, he appealed, again representing himself. He lost the appeal. At some point, he created the website Cafc43v3r linked to, on which he labels everyone involved in the matter as either a criminal or a crook.
    You’d think you would just leave it after the initial case against you was dropped.
  • Options
    bobmunro said:
    I will be keeping an eye on the match thread!

    But I really don't think it will go ahead and my money is on Elliot withdrawing the claim.

    1/3 Withdrawn
    5/2 Goes ahead
    You laying this action Bob?
  • Sponsored links:


  • Options
    CH4RLTON said:
    bobmunro said:
    I will be keeping an eye on the match thread!

    But I really don't think it will go ahead and my money is on Elliot withdrawing the claim.

    1/3 Withdrawn
    5/2 Goes ahead
    You laying this action Bob?

    Prices are for information only!!
  • Options
    bobmunro said:
    CH4RLTON said:
    bobmunro said:
    I will be keeping an eye on the match thread!

    But I really don't think it will go ahead and my money is on Elliot withdrawing the claim.

    1/3 Withdrawn
    5/2 Goes ahead
    You laying this action Bob?

    Prices are for information only!!
    Fancied a score on the yes, I'm sure one of the daft bookies life Paddy Power would probably lay something like this.
  • Options
    Red card for Elliott and own goal for Farnell
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!