Too often they’re not

oday I’m reading that, according to the official site of the Court of Appeal: “The Civil Procedure Rules and their related practice directions govern the procedure for the initiation and progress of civil claims before the County Court, High Court and Court of Appeal (Civil Division) in England and Wales.”

It’s nice that they have Civil Procedure Rules, but in my experience law firms do not obey these rules. When facing a Litigant in Person like me, they vainly assume they’d never get caught or reported for it. Worse yet, they intentionally lie all the time because they get paid for to do so – even if that means they are in contempt of court. Again, they assume they’re above the law and nobody will ever hold them accountable for it.

I wrote about this yesterday.

It should be noted that law firms cannot assert their breaches are accidental, involuntary etc. They went to school to learn these rules.

Learning as I go along

ut of both interest and necessity (not mere curiosity), lately I’ve been studying how the Court of Appeal operates, seeing it is split into just two areas. For the Court of Appeal Civil Division there is not a long queue of cases (compared to courts below it) and on Monday, for instance, only one Judgment will be issued (Osei-Bonsu v Secretary of State for the Home Department) with no hearings or any of the ordinary things. Three judges will be present: Lord Justice Males, Lady Justice Elisabeth Laing and Lady Justice Whipple.

From what I have seen, there are typically if not always 3 judges in such cases. In the past I covered cases where 7 judges issued a ruling. It was about the EPO. The EPO’s management lost.

One upside of the legal system here (despite the considerable cost) is that reporters do not get killed with impunity, people aren’t incarcerated without proper due process and access to justice, sites/papers/articles don’t get deplatformed just because of certified lunatics who try to blackmail webhosts.

I study the law (and protocols) as a Litigant in Person who needs to know how to manage oneself, as lawyers are very expensive. The knowledge gained does help me compose future articles.

Hard to pretend it ain’t happening

recently learned that the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) will take a privilege ruling to the UK Supreme Court. Being the SRA, it’ll probably end up being a waste of British people’s money with no serious outcome.

Over the past 3 years I’ve had a lot of hands-on experience with the legal system here. This week, for example, I’ve learned that “Court of Appeal Judges are senior judges with lengthy judicial experience. Appointment is by The King on the recommendation of a selection panel convened by the Judicial Appointments Commission.” In the High Court, judges are forced to retire at age 75.

I learned that many judges are in fact barristers. Some of them get gradually elevated to that role, with or without “Silk” (KC), but there is still potential for conflict of interest due to past loyalties or old colleagues (who might still be close friends).

The SRA has a similar “revolving doors” problem; many who work at the SRA came from law firms and many people inside law firms used to work for the SRA. Many solicitors and barristers once worked for the government (e.g. Home Office or Ministry of Justice).

How do we tackle this issue without ‘insulting’ people?

Will Reform UK disband this year, then reappear in a new shell?

don’t know what goes on there, but something did happen yesterday (maybe an upload):

They are already trying to censor blog posts about it, I assume using some threats.

That’s only to be expected from a corrupt, fascistic, racist political party (in commercial clothing or vice versa). Even the way they conduct elections is rigged. They take bribes from foreigners, run elections at taxpayers’ expense, then refuse to keep their promises (which is why they nowadays risk being out of business).

ibera Chat (IRC network) has a CoC, but this CoC seems to not cover really tasteless things or simply does not enforce the rules against truly terrible and potentially dangerous people. In the interests of transparency, I’d like to share information about the sorts of people protected by Libera Chat:

Sweaty Farage

he program I wrote 4 years ago helps track changes in RSS feeds, so today I noticed the following recent alternations:

In my other blog today, I explored how the other
documents, a [redacted], served on their party headquarters,

the somebody who brought their party into insolvency proceedings in 2022.

leaked by the MouseInTheCourt before the [redacted] ever arrived on
various judgments in the history of Reform UK Party Limited.

Reform UK tries to [redacted], they have complained
to the court that [redacted] other failed candidates,
how to [redacted].

If they block more people [redacted]

Those are at least 4 changes (redactions) as can be seen by comparing, for example, the original to this copy.

So I can only assume that Reform UK is feeling nervous and sending threats.

Two more recent redactions:

various judgments in the history of Reform UK Party Limited.

being subject to a [redacted debt collection].

begin [redacted]. Does that mean
Nigel Farage can simply pay me the money and exit the [redacted]
procedure? Maybe not. [redacted].

Things have progressed:

Will they create a new shell to whitewash their actions?