Author Topic: TFL judicial review  (Read 2490 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

cp8759

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3073
  • Karma: +78/-3
    • View Profile
Re: TFL judicial review
« Reply #45 on: December 02, 2023, 02:32:19 pm »
I've just heard that TfL have won the judicial review, the interested parties have until Thursday to ask for permission to appeal.
Personally, I have no faith in the justice system.
Last time I ran the numbers, I'd won 91.36% of all cases in the sample period I looked at. Taking this morning as an example, I've won 6 cases and one has been adjourned to give the council an opportunity to respond. I wonder how much faith local authorities have in the justice system?
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law. Section 6 of the Interpretation Act 1978 applies to everything I post as it would apply to an Act of Parliament. I am a Conservative councillor, this means some people think I am "scum". I am not a lawyer.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order

Hippocrates

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 735
  • Karma: +10/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: The Cosmos.
    • View Profile
Re: TFL judicial review
« Reply #46 on: December 02, 2023, 05:12:18 pm »
I've just heard that TfL have won the judicial review, the interested parties have until Thursday to ask for permission to appeal.
Personally, I have no faith in the justice system.
Last time I ran the numbers, I'd won 91.36% of all cases in the sample period I looked at. Taking this morning as an example, I've won 6 cases and one has been adjourned to give the council an opportunity to respond. I wonder how much faith local authorities have in the justice system?
Good question.  I would rephrase it:  I wonder how much faith they have in their staff? My statement above is specific to the top end of the system. And, it was indeed "unfortunate" that a certain person was not granted the right to speak in the TFL Review case. In the other case, I wonder whether the judge had even read all the paperwork since a clear error occurred. It is simply not good enough to order an appellant/claimant to pay the wrong body!
There are known knowns which, had we known, we would never have wished to know. It is known that this also applies to the known unknowns. However, when one attends a hearing, Mr Rumsfeld's idea that there are also unknown unknowns fails to apply because, anyone who is in the know, knows that unknown unknowns are purely a deception otherwise known as an aleatory experience or also known as a lottery. I know that I know this to be a fact and, in this knowledge, I know that I am fully prepared to present my case but, paradoxically, in full knowledge that the unknown unknowns may well apply in view of some adjudicators' lack of knowing what they ought to know.

"Hippocrates"

Hippocrates

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 735
  • Karma: +10/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: The Cosmos.
    • View Profile
Re: TFL judicial review
« Reply #47 on: December 08, 2023, 07:02:14 pm »
Well, today at a hearing, Mr Chan made his views quite clear concerning the High Court decision and said that "he was stuck with it."
There are known knowns which, had we known, we would never have wished to know. It is known that this also applies to the known unknowns. However, when one attends a hearing, Mr Rumsfeld's idea that there are also unknown unknowns fails to apply because, anyone who is in the know, knows that unknown unknowns are purely a deception otherwise known as an aleatory experience or also known as a lottery. I know that I know this to be a fact and, in this knowledge, I know that I am fully prepared to present my case but, paradoxically, in full knowledge that the unknown unknowns may well apply in view of some adjudicators' lack of knowing what they ought to know.

"Hippocrates"

cp8759

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3073
  • Karma: +78/-3
    • View Profile
Re: TFL judicial review
« Reply #48 on: January 29, 2024, 02:59:29 pm »
Just got this from TFL:

The legal costs paid for this case were 112,674.50.

If we add the 46,200 incurred at the tribunal, that's a total of 158,874.50.

And they didn't even get everything they wanted.
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law. Section 6 of the Interpretation Act 1978 applies to everything I post as it would apply to an Act of Parliament. I am a Conservative councillor, this means some people think I am "scum". I am not a lawyer.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order

andy_foster

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 288
  • Karma: +4/-1
  • Location: Reading
    • View Profile
Re: TFL judicial review
« Reply #49 on: January 29, 2024, 06:50:07 pm »
As their KC was mostly spouting bollox (to the exasperation of the judge) and had to be lead by the judge as to which door to push against, I feel that they got poor value for money.
I am responsible for the accuracy of the information I post, not your ability to comprehend it.

cp8759

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3073
  • Karma: +78/-3
    • View Profile
Re: TFL judicial review
« Reply #50 on: January 29, 2024, 11:20:09 pm »
I believe they can reclaim the VAT, so that knocks it down to 132,395.42.

That's just 827 PCNs' worth, so not that expensive really.
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law. Section 6 of the Interpretation Act 1978 applies to everything I post as it would apply to an Act of Parliament. I am a Conservative councillor, this means some people think I am "scum". I am not a lawyer.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order

Incandescent

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1059
  • Karma: +27/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: Crewe
    • View Profile
Re: TFL judicial review
« Reply #51 on: February 13, 2024, 12:09:24 pm »
When you read about judges, you seem to always see the words "the learned judge" Hm... I don't think all judges are as learned as we would like to believe.

andy_foster

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 288
  • Karma: +4/-1
  • Location: Reading
    • View Profile
Re: TFL judicial review
« Reply #52 on: February 13, 2024, 12:34:46 pm »
For those familiar with Hanlon's razor, High Court Judges are very intelligent.
I am responsible for the accuracy of the information I post, not your ability to comprehend it.

cp8759

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3073
  • Karma: +78/-3
    • View Profile
Re: TFL judicial review
« Reply #53 on: February 18, 2024, 10:48:00 pm »
When you read about judges, you seem to always see the words "the learned judge" Hm... I don't think all judges are as learned as we would like to believe.
The problem with any sort of appellate process is that highly specialised jurisdictions are subject to the supervisory authority of judges who might never have looked at an area of law before. The judge asked counsel for assistance on this odd "procedural impropriety" concept that was all over the panel decision as the judge was not sure what the adjudicators were on about, needless to say Mr Korner was unable to provide any assistance.
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law. Section 6 of the Interpretation Act 1978 applies to everything I post as it would apply to an Act of Parliament. I am a Conservative councillor, this means some people think I am "scum". I am not a lawyer.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order