DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: News / Press Articles
*****************************************************
#Post#: 8365--------------------------------------------------
TfL v. LT (EAT Adjudicators)
By: John U.K. Date: October 25, 2023, 11:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
From the Royal Courts of Justice daily cause list 26 October
2023
BEFORE JUSTICE SWIFT
10:30AM
(on the application of TRANSPORT FOR LONDON) v LONDON TRIBUNALS
(ENVIRONMENT AND TRAFFIC ADJUDICA
As far I can see it is open to the public, should anyone be
interested.
#Post#: 8371--------------------------------------------------
Re: TfL v. LT (EAT Adjudicators)
By: ivanleo Date: October 25, 2023, 12:28 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
All High Court hearings are open to the public unless the court
has specifically ordered a private hearing, which would be in
very limited circumstances such as matters involving national
security and a few other scenarios where the need to maintain
confidentiality overrides the open justice principle.
#Post#: 8468--------------------------------------------------
Re: TfL v. LT (EAT Adjudicators) UPDATE
By: John U.K. Date: October 26, 2023, 9:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
These sites carry reports. The first is regularly updated.
HTML https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/transport-for-london-tfl-high-court-parking-tickets-cctv-b1116055.html#comments-area
Similar to Standard but less adverts
HTML https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/tfl-could-refund-500-000-065411720.html
No mention of barrister or case for LT - sounds as if CPS had to
make their own case?
Case concluded 4p.m,. judgement reserved - expected in a few
weeks.
#Post#: 9037--------------------------------------------------
Re: TfL v. LT (EAT Adjudicators)
By: guest17 Date: November 2, 2023, 12:40 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
See they are still unwilling/unable to let Ivan speak although
his client company can. Relegating him to a Mackenzie Friend
because he isn't a lawyer is really pathetic given he and
phantomcrusader spotted the glitch and Ivan developed the legal
defence which resulted in this HC case.
Mike
#Post#: 9046--------------------------------------------------
Re: TfL v. LT (EAT Adjudicators)
By: Southpaw82 Date: November 2, 2023, 1:52 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=MMV Redux link=topic=789.msg9037#msg9037
date=1698946805]
See they are still unwilling/unable to let Ivan speak although
his client company can. Relegating him to a Mackenzie Friend
because he isn't a lawyer is really pathetic given he and
phantomcrusader spotted the glitch and Ivan developed the legal
defence which resulted in this HC case.
Mike
[/quote]
The reason (as I understand it) is that unqualified
representatives aren’t generally given a right of audience
because they don’t owe professional duties to the court or their
client. I’m sure there are more reasons and that it varies on a
case by case basis but that is the general position.
#Post#: 9083--------------------------------------------------
Re: TfL v. LT (EAT Adjudicators)
By: guest17 Date: November 3, 2023, 4:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Then whatever ETA defence there is (is there one?) should call
him as a material witness. Otherwise, with the greatest respect,
he becomes the elephant in the room.
If Ivan was the reason behind the ETA acceptance of the CCTV
defence and was responsible for an avalanche of successful cases
I cannot appreciate the judge's remarks that there are no
"exceptional circumstances" to grant him audience.
This attitude reflects what the TfL lawyers tried to do in an
earlier meeting--"not legally qualified,therefore we are not
listening to him and by the way he can not charge a fee".
This completely ignores the ETA judicial process that lay people
can represent others in sometimes complex legal hearings. I find
the remark by the judge that Ivan's client company should have
engaged a lawyer to be rather a sad reflection of how ETA
operates.
Surely there must be a way for Ivan to address the Court?
Mike
#Post#: 9145--------------------------------------------------
Re: TfL v. LT (EAT Adjudicators)
By: ivanleo Date: November 4, 2023, 7:52 am
---------------------------------------------------------
It's a bit late for that, but it occurred to me on the day that
I should have got a PCN of my own so that I could be joined as a
party. You live and learn.
#Post#: 9569--------------------------------------------------
Re: TfL v. LT (EAT Adjudicators)
By: Hippocrates Date: November 8, 2023, 7:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I attended and I regard it as disgraceful.
*****************************************************