Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Injunction Hearing Sept 1st
Comments
-
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/
0 -
These people used to stand on the Strand ranting about these thingsCafc43v3r said:1 -
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........Off_it said:0 -
You're right, just received the second email with a promise of an invitation just before 2:00 pm on Tuesday.ForeverAddickted said:
You probably havent... I think people were messaging on the morning of the last hearing and were getting quick responses to gain accessfat man on a moped said:
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.ForeverAddickted said:manchester.chancery@justice.gov.uk
Reference: BL-2020-MAN-000077
Guess justice doesn't take bank holidays!0 -
Just received mine as well !!fat man on a moped said:
You're right, just received the second email with a promise of an invitation just before 2:00 pm on Tuesday.ForeverAddickted said:
You probably havent... I think people were messaging on the morning of the last hearing and were getting quick responses to gain accessfat man on a moped said:
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.ForeverAddickted said:manchester.chancery@justice.gov.uk
Reference: BL-2020-MAN-000077
Guess justice doesn't take bank holidays!
0 -
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 Withdrawn5/2 Goes aheadIf 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.0
-
meldrew66 said:
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........Off_it said:
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.
0 -
You’d think you would just leave it after the initial case against you was dropped.Gillis said:meldrew66 said:
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........Off_it said:
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.1 -
Sponsored links:
-
Fancied a score on the yes, I'm sure one of the daft bookies life Paddy Power would probably lay something like this.bobmunro said:
0 -
Red card for Elliott and own goal for Farnell0
