Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2018 14:28:57 GMT
Maybe Tony got caught by the rozzers, scaling the fence at the shipyard...
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on Feb 7, 2018 14:39:16 GMT
Plus ca change, as they say. I obtained a copy of a 1955 Law Report yesterday, with extraordinarily current observations by the High Court judge, respecting the conduct of a CaRT predecessor β the British Transport Commission.
βThe defendants [BTC] well knew, he (his Lordship) was sure, that their failure to repair it was unlawful, but they hoped, he supposed, that no bargee would be able to find the means to contest their inaction in the High Court.β . . .
β. . . if that was the law, then it was the duty of a statutory monopoly to obey it, just as much as anybody else; indeed, if possible, even more so, because its opportunities of getting the law altered would appear to be greater.β . . . βthat a statutory monopoly should practise and justify statute-breaking was surely pessimi exempli.β
Gould v British Transport Commission, ChD, Times Law Report, July 22 1955.
There is something ineffably sad in the reflection that modern jurisprudence seems to have shifted away from such robust defence of the public, and of constitutional principles. It applies to so much of what goes on today.
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on Feb 7, 2018 15:00:27 GMT
Plus ca change, as they say. I obtained a copy of a 1955 Law Report yesterday, with extraordinarily current observations by the High Court judge, respecting the conduct of a CaRT predecessor β the British Transport Commission. β The defendants [BTC] well knew, he (his Lordship) was sure, that their failure to repair it was unlawful, but they hoped, he supposed, that no bargee would be able to find the means to contest their inaction in the High Court.β . . . β . . . if that was the law, then it was the duty of a statutory monopoly to obey it, just as much as anybody else; indeed, if possible, even more so, because its opportunities of getting the law altered would appear to be greater.β . . . β that a statutory monopoly should practise and justify statute-breaking was surely pessimi exempli.β Gould v British Transport Commission, ChD, Times Law Report, July 22 1955. There is something ineffably sad in the reflection that modern jurisprudence seems to have shifted away from such robust defence of the public, and of constitutional principles. It applies to so much of what goes on today. Would that be the same (John ?) Gould whose canal carrier business was finished off by the BTC's decision to let the Kennet and Avon fall into disrepair to the point of becoming unnavigable, Nigel ? If I remember correctly, the canal was never formally abandoned or closed, it was was simply left to fall to pieces, . . . in much the same way as C&RT are at present keeping us all 'connected with history' by allowing the canals under their care to revert to same neglected and semi-decrepit state that so many were in immediately after WW2 !
|
|
|
Post by bargemast on Feb 7, 2018 15:02:45 GMT
Plus ca change, as they say. I obtained a copy of a 1955 Law Report yesterday, with extraordinarily current observations by the High Court judge, respecting the conduct of a CaRT predecessor β the British Transport Commission. β The defendants [BTC] well knew, he (his Lordship) was sure, that their failure to repair it was unlawful, but they hoped, he supposed, that no bargee would be able to find the means to contest their inaction in the High Court.β . . . β . . . if that was the law, then it was the duty of a statutory monopoly to obey it, just as much as anybody else; indeed, if possible, even more so, because its opportunities of getting the law altered would appear to be greater.β . . . β that a statutory monopoly should practise and justify statute-breaking was surely pessimi exempli.β Gould v British Transport Commission, ChD, Times Law Report, July 22 1955. There is something ineffably sad in the reflection that modern jurisprudence seems to have shifted away from such robust defence of the public, and of constitutional principles. It applies to so much of what goes on today. Could it be that it's just a meeting between a couple of good mates, the judges and some of the criminal lawyers playing golf together when they're not in court. They don't want to upset their golf mates, or maybe their golf-mates know something about the judges that nobody else should know of, and so just say whatever is best for them. It may be clear that I'm not a great believer in "justice" anymore. Peter.
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on Feb 7, 2018 15:19:32 GMT
Would that be the same (John ?) Gould whose canal carrier business was finished off by the BTC's decision to let the Kennet and Avon fall into disrepair to the point of becoming unnavigable, Nigel ? If I remember correctly, the canal was never formally abandoned or closed, it was was simply left to fall to pieces, . . . in much the same way as C&RT are at present keeping us all 'connected with history' by allowing the canals under their care to revert to same neglected and semi-decrepit state that so many were in immediately after WW2 ! It was indeed Tony. He went too far in demanding an injunction, but was given Β£5,000 compensation in an out of court settlement. The case led directly to BTC petitioning Parliament for authority to abandon the K&A, but by then the public outcry - largely led by John Gould [who carried on campaigning for the eventually successful restoration] - effectually defeated the attempt, and the result largely of his efforts, was the re-opening of the canal. Boaters and non-boating enthusiasts were far more active back then; pity it is that we are now populated by the indifferent and over optimistic.
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on Feb 7, 2018 15:34:37 GMT
Could it be that it's just a meeting between a couple of good mates, the judges and some of the criminal lawyers playing golf together when they're not in court. They don't want to upset their golf mates, or maybe their golf-mates know something about the judges that nobody else should know of, and so just say whatever is best for them. It may be clear that I'm not a great believer in "justice" anymore. Peter. More likely chats over the regular law society dinners, but mostly I incline to think that the impetus comes from governmental figures having quiet words in the corridors over the direction they wish the courts to follow when dealing with quasi-governmental bodies. For so long as that does not noticeably impinge upon the professional jealousness over the βindependenceβ of the judiciary, it will inevitably influence decisions.
|
|
|
Post by NigelMoore on Feb 7, 2018 15:58:25 GMT
βBefore him (his Lordship) the defendants had admitted breaches of statutory duty, and by their defence they offered to submit to an inquiry as to damages, but they resisted any injunction, with or without suspension. Apparently they preferred to persist in their admittedly unlawful conduct and await the action for damages which, unless Parliament intervened, anybody who bona fide wished to use the canal and tendered the toll would thereafter be able to bring an action against them with good hope of success. Whether the Court would countenance that attitude could only be decided at the trial.β [my bold]
Deja Vu? It is perhaps unsurprising that BTC decided to settle out of court and obviate further censure; these days their successor would be more likely to persist, encouraged by judgments such as that of Asplin J.
Pertinent to my response to bargemast, that judge was promptly βrewardedβ [?] with elevation to Lady Justice of Appeal; I am unconvinced that her judgment reflected her true feelings on the matter.
|
|
|
Post by bargemast on Feb 7, 2018 17:24:58 GMT
β Before him (his Lordship) the defendants had admitted breaches of statutory duty, and by their defence they offered to submit to an inquiry as to damages, but they resisted any injunction, with or without suspension. Apparently they preferred to persist in their admittedly unlawful conduct and await the action for damages which, unless Parliament intervened, anybody who bona fide wished to use the canal and tendered the toll would thereafter be able to bring an action against them with good hope of success. Whether the Court would countenance that attitude could only be decided at the trial.β [my bold] Deja Vu? It is perhaps unsurprising that BTC decided to settle out of court and obviate further censure; these days their successor would be more likely to persist, encouraged by judgments such as that of Asplin J. Pertinent to my response to bargemast, that judge was promptly βrewardedβ [?] with elevation to Lady Justice of Appeal; I am unconvinced that her judgment reflected her true feelings on the matter. Modern justice seems to be often like : "Punish the innocent, and praise the guilty". Often the same in some big companies/trusts/charities (of which one example often comes up on this forum) when someone in a high position makes a real cock up, he/she'll be promoted, get's a pay rise, and is sometimes moved to another location, with many extra benefits. Peter.
|
|
|
Post by bargemast on Feb 7, 2018 17:30:35 GMT
Fulford was a founder member of an organisation called Conspiracy Against Public Morals which published a sickening pamphlet claiming that children would be freed from the oppression of the state and their parents if they were allowed to have sex with adults. "i cant even read all of this story without want to be physically sick .. lowering the age of consent to 4 ? what on earth are these sick and twisted scum on ? cos surely they done breath the same air as most people do" "It's time that the UK Judges are elected, by vote of the electorate, every 4 years.. That is why sentences are so harsh in the US.. if the Judges don't listen to the electorate, they're out of a job.." " "Lord Justice Fulford, pictured in his full legal regalia" And when we are about it lets abolish all this garb of wigs,golden adorned gowns etc etc which only give a false veneer of power and respectability to the legal profession. The US dispenses with wigs." www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2576451/High-court-judge-child-sex-ring-Adviser-Queen-founder-paedophile-support-group-offenders-jail.htmlIt looks more like going to a fancy dress party where you'll be surrounded by people with a very bad taste for fancy dresses, or to a carnival instead of to a place where "justice" is supposed to be delt with. Peter.
|
|
|
Post by wreckwatcher on Feb 13, 2018 16:10:19 GMT
Oi, come on - forget the bloke in the frock; let's have some more gossip about the good ship 'Planet' please!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2018 16:45:45 GMT
Oi, come on - forget the bloke in the frock; let's have some more gossip about the good ship 'Planet' please! Apparently it was took away... by bad men.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2018 17:12:14 GMT
Its good to keep up to date though.
My secret service colleagues have taken if off the priority list as it is no longer of national security interest.
Apparently there was a bearded dark skinned man who kept muttering "bismillah" and similar words under his breath who was interested in taking Planet to London which sparked some concern but after some undercover work he's been quietly exported to Guantanamo bay now so no longer a risk.
It will be intersting to see what happens to it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2018 18:56:42 GMT
Its good to keep up to date though. My secret service colleagues have taken if off the priority list as it is no longer of national security interest. Apparently there was a bearded dark skinned man who kept muttering "bismillah" and similar words under his breath who was interested in taking Planet to London which sparked some concern but after some undercover work he's been quietly exported to Guantanamo bay now so no longer a risk. It will be intersting to see what happens to it. The bearded man or the ship?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2018 19:03:27 GMT
Its good to keep up to date though. My secret service colleagues have taken if off the priority list as it is no longer of national security interest. Apparently there was a bearded dark skinned man who kept muttering "bismillah" and similar words under his breath who was interested in taking Planet to London which sparked some concern but after some undercover work he's been quietly exported to Guantanamo bay now so no longer a risk. It will be intersting to see what happens to it. The bearded man or the ship? I was referring to the Planet light ship.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Feb 14, 2018 9:28:45 GMT
The thing I don't understand about the whole thing is,even if you accept that CaRT were allowed to tow it away legally( I don't think this was legal.) Then what about selling it for a fraction of its value, to someone you know? The whole thing stinks, where are the police and what are they doing.
|
|