Discussion

Main Board| Accommodation Wanted| Accommodation Offered
Start a new discussion on this board

Let your next career move come to you.

Oh Dear. Mishcon's bundle bungle
Anonymous (not verified) 17 Sep 19 10:55
Reply |

The electronic bundle isn't the same as the paper one and the court can't find the documents. Oops

No he isn't uncomfortable just because he is in the SC. He knows he is dealing with judges who were having tons of fun yesterday basking in being the serious decision makers about Parliament vs Executive but who today are not going to let him talk about the reality of the endpoint of the decision they are making.

'.It is appalling that these ignorant and irresponsible men should be cutting [    ] to bits as if they were dividing a cake.'

I think it would be a huge clusterfvck if the supremes made a positive finding of improper purpose. I don’t see that the evidence that’s been led supports it. (Although obv we all know that’s what happened.) 

Well that was always going to be the dilemma wasn't it? Bit of a fudge and a huge embarrassment to say nothing of what johnny normal will think if the SC says the case against the govt in effect hasn't been made?

Well yes mutters but do you think they can impute that based on what you’ve heard? It’s all a bit *gestures vaguely*

 

maybe the ranty man took on board Brenda’s earlier comments about amplification and has overcorrected 

"Well yes mutters but do you think they can impute that based on what you’ve heard?"

But that isn't their role is it?

And the Scots court heard it all properly and made a finding of improper motive on the facts in front of them.

This whole devolution thing is a bit of a cluster fook - if they find it justiciable could they send it back to the CoA given that the Scots have already determined that fact?  Who gets the tie breaker if the CoA says it isn't proven on the facts and the Scots say it is?

tweet from David Allen Green

Now Michael Fordham for Welsh government

Fordham is the author of the most detailed practitioner guide on judicial review https://www.wildy.com/isbn/9781509922833/judicial-review-handbook-6th-ed-hardback-hart-publishing-f1868ab7-a7bd-494e-a411-fd0f5dfe75f4 …

He may be only barrister to have read and considered every single judicial review case ever

Ubergeek

Hence why this is case-heavy

I suppose the Supreme Court could say it is justiciable but that the Scots were just wrong on their determination of facts.  I mean that isn't likely but its not unheard of is it for an appelate court to determine that there was no reasonable way for a lower court to have made the factual determination they did based off of the evidence available to them (albeit I'm not sure they've actually argued that?).

I met her at a reception in the Law Society once when she was giving out prizes for something and I was shortlisted (and did not win - as always) and she said "Hello, I'm Brenda Hale" and I said "I know! And I'm..." with a huge smile on my face as it was such a normal conversation and she said "I know" back, which made us both laugh. I said she only knew my name because it was on her shortlist briefing papers but I knew her because she was a jurisprudential legend. She chuckled like my granny.  Oddest moment of an odd few years.

So enjoying this thread.

Beeb has shut down the live feed, presumably until 2pm.

Not going to divert off topic but I miss the White Book days.

It is astounding how much leeway some of these advocates are getting for completely shoddy work and submissions - presumably the SC are conscious of the cameras and media coverage but if anything I think that should bolster them to carry on as it should be done and publicly b0ll0ck into next week the worst transgressions for all to see. They are being far too accommodating - turn it around, make it clear this is not 'Judge Rinder' or 'The Jeremy Kyle Show and lay some firm parameters down.

Hale is now on my afternoon tea wishlist.

If Hale just said "listen sonny, this isn't Judge Rinder" and pressed the big red button on the desk and gave him a big X  brrrrr   then I would give up my job and campaign tirelessly for however long it took to make her Prime Minister.

This is rof gold and has brought me out of hibernation.

To answer your question Teclis, yes we reached 1,000+ in the great Owl thread of 2006 (2007?) which brought about the icon (is the icon still a new thing on new rof?)

From Dux's separate thread:

----

[This] thread is perfect and pure ROF, Dux.

Absolutely, beautifully perfect.

The one thing that has shot through the absolute bollox this Board has become for the last 3+ years is a thread that at its core is about a Supreme Court hearing and ruling over Brexit / some w@nky sub-side of it and yet it's got back to what ROF used to be about and has finally managed to repel (for many, many posts and pages now - and I trust every effort will be made to keep it so) the tired, boring and repeated attempts to drum Brexit arguments into pretty much everything. That it's about bundling in a case that is at the heart of Brexit is all the more for the good.

Long live threads on bundling or whatever that brings this Board back to camaraderie and long may we have such octo-tun discourse without twunts derailing and reducing almost everything on here to division and divisiveness.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Banging it home relentlessly all over the Board is just fvcking boring and ruins this place. The Bundles Thread has brought something back which those doing that have largely taken away from ROF. Less is more but the good stuff is always good.

Bundles are organised, work as a team
Bundles are tidy and Wombles are clean
Underground, overground, Bundling free
The Bundles of Bundledon Common are we

 

I am thinking of pitching an animated series about Bundling to the BBC

Join the discussion

Login Register