|
Post by Allan on May 17, 2017 22:11:59 GMT
Notification from Shoosmiths? I presume you have checked the facts... I expressed to same concern to Nigel privately but was reassured by a similar reply to that posted here. However, I feel that there is something wrong with our judicial system when the court fails to provide information to both parties ...
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on May 17, 2017 22:31:36 GMT
Notification from Shoosmiths? I presume you have checked the facts... I expressed to same concern to Nigel privately but was reassured by a similar reply to that posted here. However, I feel that there is something wrong with our judicial system when the court fails to provide information to both parties ... I wonder if this happens in the same way and with similar frequency when both sides are represented by lawyers as opposed to one being a LiP ? I understand that LCD / MoJ guidelines for the Judiciary dictate that LiP's should be helped and assisted by the Courts, . . . . nice idea, just a shame it doesn't seem to get put into practice !
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on May 17, 2017 22:38:06 GMT
The court does not usually send off such information to either party; they rely on them looking up the online listings which get published after 2pm the day before the expected start. It is unusual in my limited experience to have had such extreme uncertainty hanging over one - it will be a week later than originally slated in this instance.
The advantage for law firms is that they have eager young clerks to run around proactively chasing up chums in the various offices for the latest intel that would not otherwise be available. At least they are sharing this.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on May 18, 2017 8:31:37 GMT
The extent to which pretty well all members of the legal profession, from the lowliest Clerks to the loftiest Judges, all piss into the same pot is not something that is generally known. Whilst this does not necessarily have to disadvantage a LiP, provided always that every single professional lawyer never fails to live up to the standards of integrity and impartiality to which the legal 'system' aspires, things don't always pan out that way in the real world. Conduct from 'professionals', even those with something of a reputation within the profession itself for bending the rules, that would and should bring the wrath of the Courts down on a LiP has, on occasions, been allowed to pass by without so much as the raising of a judicial eyebrow.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2017 9:28:07 GMT
The extent to which pretty well all members of the legal profession, from the lowliest Clerks to the loftiest Judges, all piss into the same pot is not something that is generally known. Whilst this does not necessarily have to disadvantage a LiP, provided always that every single professional lawyer never fails to live up to the standards of integrity and impartiality to which the legal 'system' aspires, things don't always pan out that way in the real world. Conduct from 'professionals', even those with something of a reputation within the profession itself for bending the rules, that would and should bring the wrath of the Courts down on a LiP has, on occasions, been allowed to pass by without so much as the raising of a judicial eyebrow. Just wait until Corbyn gets in. I'm sure he'll make it more transparent. Lol.
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on May 18, 2017 15:16:47 GMT
For those still anxious about the veracity of the postponement details, the Judge's clerk has just emailed Leigh asking for a 'Word' copy of his skeleton argument, confirming the hearing start on Monday morning.
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on May 19, 2017 14:10:45 GMT
|
|
|
Post by erivers on May 19, 2017 14:46:51 GMT
Whether it is of any significance I do not know but Mrs Justice Asplin would appear to have a refreshingly understanding attitude to Litigants-in-Person and Mackenzie Friends. www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/asplin-j-the-need-to-coordinate-lip-initiatives-autumn-2016.pdfNigel, only if you are allowed to be heard in court on all the compelling points you raise and in spite of Mr Stoner's arrogant efforts to have some of the evidence disregarded or disallowed, will justice be properly served. Best wishes in your superb effort to achieve a good and fair result for Leigh (and a wake-up call to those intent on abusing power).
|
|
|
Post by kris on May 21, 2017 13:12:53 GMT
Good luck in court tmw, I'm sure there are lots of people who await the outcome with anticipation.
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on May 21, 2017 15:05:05 GMT
Thanks, will try updating as we go. Time allotted is 4 days, though I cannot see why it should take that long. Am on bus heading for London just now, hopefully Leigh is already holed up at a friend's house nearby the court.
|
|
|
Post by zigspider on May 21, 2017 16:49:05 GMT
Best of luck to both Nigel and Leigh.. Will be thinking of you..
|
|
|
Post by bargemast on May 21, 2017 17:50:25 GMT
I wish you both best of luck too, and "May justice exist and win".
Peter.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on May 21, 2017 18:36:31 GMT
Yes definitely Nigel, all the best of luck for you and Leigh
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on May 21, 2017 19:09:26 GMT
Ditto ^^^^^^^^
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on May 22, 2017 19:29:22 GMT
First day over; Judge began urging settlement and gave us first 10 minutes to decide if there was potential, and then when Mr Stoner came back and told her that though it was not ruled out the time was too short, she gave a full hour of time out. No dice from CaRT, so we went ahead, First precis of case outlined from me with quite a few probing questions from the Judge, then Leigh cross-examined on his witness statement by Mr Stoner, followed by an exceptionally brief cross of Garner and Mr Deards by me, despite having prepared lengthy lists of questions - but I took my cue from the Judge that she wanted tight focus on issues directly determinative of the questions she had to decide, which meant that there was really no point in just making them look bad over their opinions.
Tomorrow will be afternoon only from 2pm, when we watch a selection of video clips on the court's widescreen - if my laptop works with Shoosmiths' lead and both work with the courts equipment. We will then have the benefit of Mr Stoner's exposition for the rest of the day and probably into Wednesday, with time for a final word on Leigh's behalf. 3 days max.
Leigh has held his end up very well in my opinion, under some relentless chasing over details.
|
|