Monday, 19 November 2012

CMs and the Law

I am in love with Mrs Justice Cox DBE. She being the lady responsible for pointing out that in the case of certain K&A boaters their claims are of no merit, unarguable and will cost £15,000.

Her summation in the case of THE QUEEN on the application of NICK BROWN (Claimant) and CANAL & RIVER TRUST (Defendant) is here in PDF format. I have no legal training whatsoever, but I have always argued that the Mooring Guidance 2004 was to all intents and purposes easy to understand assuming one had Secondary School Education. I never thought the 2011 update was necessary.

Using the plain simple language that you and I  would use, she very carefully de-constructed his whole argument. She served up a 26 page document which you have to read as a legal document with a straight face or you may laugh at some of the Claimants erm ……claims.

He claims that a reason for overstaying, other than those listed, was ‘personal choice’ !!! He claimed that BW (as it was then)  should have conducted an ‘equality impact assessment’ under the Equality Act. Even his claim that his rights under Article 8 of the Human Rights Act had been violated were put aside by the judge.

Wholly irrelevant, No validity, unpersuasive, unsustainable, erroneous, unarguable,  without merit are all words used by Justice Cox to describe various parts of the Claimants case.

Have a read but don’t laugh!
http://canalrivertrust.org.uk/media/library/2257.pdf

6 comments:

scabby said...

Holy shit!!! Way to go :)

Allan said...

I'm so so sorry I read all 28 pages and could not stop laughing I am truly sorry. lol
Now Is everyone clear on what CCer's means now?

Kevin said...

It's all very well for you to tell me not to laugh... but... ROFLMAO

The Grumpy Porter said...

Yes and even after that he is still going to appeal; I expect using the usual dance on a pinhead arguments. This line in the guidance says it all for me “Exact precision is not required or expected – what is required is that the boat is used for a genuine cruise."
And for those who think just cruising up and down the Oxford meets this genuine cruise criteria it does not.

Tom and Jan said...

Well that has set the precedence in law.

Maffi said...

It most certainly has Tom but that's not the end.