Huzar appeal

Vauban

batman44 wrote: »

I have read on the Bott & Co Twitter/Website that they are asking courts to proceed on the law as it stands as this is a public access to justice and they are asking (meeting) the Judiciary (judges) to apply this test in fairness to the public. I hope this works or we could be waiting years.

It wont. So hunker down for a wait!

Kew73

Vauban wrote: »

It wont. So hunker down for a wait!

I'm sure you're right, but are you able to share the reasons why?! Thanks

Vauban

Kew73 wrote: »

I'm sure you're right, but are you able to share the reasons why?! Thanks

For two reasons:

a) I have yet to read of a district judge prepared to allow a case to proceed - everyone here has reported their stays being maintained. And that was before an application for appeal had even been made. Now it has - and if it the appeal is further accepted - judges will be even less inclined to terminate a stay; and

b) why should they? I know that strictly Huzar is now law, but if there is a chance of a successful appeal, there is little disadvantage to the claimant by waiting to see if it is resolved. Justice delayed in this instance is not really justice denied. I know this will be an unpopular view on this forum, but I absolutely understand the judges' reticence.

chili2001

Vauban wrote: »

For two reasons:

a) I have yet to read of a district judge prepared to allow a case to proceed - everyone here has reported their stays being maintained. And that was before an application for appeal had even been made. Now it has - and if it the appeal is further accepted - judges will be even less inclined to terminate a stay; and

b) why should they? I know that strictly Huzar is now law, but if there is a chance of a successful appeal, there is little disadvantage to the claimant by waiting to see if it is resolved. Justice delayed in this instance is not really justice denied. I know this will be an unpopular view on this forum, but I absolutely understand the judges' reticence.

Your right. It is an unpopular view. In my opinion this sort of mass delaying of cases will only encourage the airlines to waste more time and avoid more of their responsibilities in failing to pay the compensation owed to thousands of people. Not to mention choking up the courts with all the held up claims. I will say it again, what's the point in having a law if the judges can just ignore it "just in case" it might get overturned in the future? What's next when they lose this appeal? Another one to the some other random universal ultra supreme Court? I have waited nearly 2 fu**ing years already to have my day in court. The UK legal system is a joke. Although i'm sure that's an unpopular view with you Vauban.

batman44

chili2001 wrote: »

Your right. It is an unpopular view. In my opinion this sort of mass delaying of cases will only encourage the airlines to waste more time and avoid more of their responsibilities in failing to pay the compensation owed to thousands of people. Not to mention choking up the courts with all the held up claims. I will say it again, what's the point in having a law if the judges can just ignore it "just in case" it might get overturned in the future? What's next when they lose this appeal? Another one to the some other random universal ultra supreme Court? I have waited nearly 2 fu**ing years already to have my day in court. The UK legal system is a joke. Although i'm sure that's an unpopular view with you Vauban.

I agree I think there has to be a penalty for this, ok stay the cases but they have to pay the intrest on the compensation they are legally owed. This is just delay, after delay, ironic isn't it?

chili2001

If the supreme Court allow this case to be appealed again the only thing I can see it being is corruption at the highest level. The high Court has already said enough is enough and refused the appeal. There always seems to be a way around the law if you have enough money to throw at the problem.

NoviceAngel

chili2001 wrote: »

The UK legal system is a joke. Although i'm sure that's an unpopular view with you Vauban.

I share your frustration at the UK legal system, my case too is currently 'stayed' despite my best efforts to get the stay lifted.

I can't answer for Vauban, but I agree with his point of view, he never said he agreed with the outcome of the Courts decision he was explaining that he understood it.

It would take a very strong DJ to make a decision and agree with Platts or our High Court judges when there's even a sniff of a similar case being challenged at SC level.

His Honour J Platts was the first one to put his head on the block so to speak, and although his decision was supported the reasoning wasn't and who's to say whether in legal terms his 'incorrect reasoning' has helped his judicial career?

It's just too big an ask to get a DJ to hear a case at the moment.

I understand but I don't agree but that's the way it is I'm afraid. I like you and many, many others will have to be patient.

NoviceAngel

chili2001

I'm sorry, I don't understand how any judge would be putting their head on a block by following the law as it stands now. Why not lift the stays on cases of compensation under £1000 which I imagine would do a lot to clear the backlog and show the airlines that they can't get out of their responsibilities that easily.

NoviceAngel

chili2001 wrote: »

I'm sorry, I don't understand how any judge would be putting their head on a block by following the law as it stands now. Why not lift the stays on cases of compensation under £1000 which I imagine would do a lot to clear the backlog and show the airlines that they can't get out of their responsibilities that easily.

I agree with you, that is indeed what they should do, that's the point I made in my application to get the stay lifted.

but ...... because of the points Vauban makes and the points I have made they won't hear the cases.

They simply don't want to be seen making a mistake and have 'egg on their face' , and IF and yes it's a great big IF the SC goes the airlines way, then the cases can be un-stayed and tried pre-huzar which could have a different outcome to post Huzar with support from the SC.

I know where you're coming from in my job sometimes you have to stick your neck out, most of the time my judgement works out but I take the risk. But why should the Judges, sometimes it's easier and less complicated to take the easy way out. Case 'Stayed' Easy!

Vauban

chili2001 wrote: »

Why not lift the stays on cases of compensation under £1000 which I imagine would do a lot to clear the backlog and show the airlines that they can't get out of their responsibilities that easily.

Er, because there is no basis in law for this - however personally convenient it might be for your claim.

If the roles were reversed, and Mr. Huzar had lost his case in the Court of Appeal but petitioned the Supreme Court, I would be apoplectic (as I suspect would you) if in the interim the airline sought to expedite a judgement stayed claims before the Supreme Court could opine. How would that be just?