Cambridge Super-Case

Stroma

I'll do the Russian translation for you later

bod1467

"Когда деньги решают правда молчит"

https://translate.google.co.uk/#auto/ru/When%20money%20talks%20the%20truth%20is%20silent

HO87

bod1467 wrote: »

"Когда деньги решают правда молчит"

https://translate.google.co.uk/#auto/ru/When%20money%20talks%20the%20truth%20is%20silent

Indeed, though if I might make some constructive criticism I'd suggest that in putting it across in that way you lacked that sense of inevitability that the Russians do so well. And is used to justify the sharing of bread, gherkins, sausage and vodka.

bazster

HO87 wrote: »

And is used to justify the sharing of bread, gherkins, sausage and vodka.

Mmmm, nearly tea-time...

Stroma

HO87 wrote: »

Indeed, though if I might make some constructive criticism I'd suggest that in putting it across in that way you lacked that sense of inevitability that the Russians do so well. And is used to justify the sharing of bread, gherkins, sausage and vodka.

You obviously know the country and people, did you spend time there? I had 8 years over there, and 18 years of being married to one

teabelly

Still nothing. The suspense is almost unbearable!

arabesque_101

Can someone explain to me why this is being called a "test" case?
Is that an official court term and why does this case seem to have some special status such that other cases are being delayed until this one finishes? Or is it simply the case that the two parties themselves have both both agreed informally that whoever loses will appeal? Or is it being held in a higher court?

I saw kirkbyinfurnesslad on page one of his thread say "unlike all the other cases this is one case that could and most likely will, end up in the Court of Appeal". But why my question is: why is that? What exactly is different about this case?

bazster

arabesque_101 wrote: »

Can someone explain to me why this is being called a "test" case?
Is that an official court term and why does this case seem to have some special status such that other cases are being delayed until this one finishes? Or is it simply the case that the two parties themselves have both both agreed informally that whoever loses will appeal? Or is it being held in a higher court?

I saw kirkbyinfurnesslad on page one of his thread say "unlike all the other cases this is one case that could and most likely will, end up in the Court of Appeal". But why my question is: why is that? What exactly is different about this case?

There are actually two very similar cases.

The most senior County Court judge on the Eastern circuit decided that he would hear these cases in person with the express intention of establishing some principles to be applied throughout his circuit. He ordered that all other cases on his circuit be stayed pending his judgement.

He has also indicated that, should either party wish to appeal his judgement, since he is the already most senior judge in the County Court, the appeal should go straight to the Appeal Court (a court of record).

Other judges across the country have taken note of all this and some of them have also stayed cases pending the outcome in Cambridge.

Of course, the Cambridge case is still in the County Court and cannot set a precedent in a formal sense, but it now seems very likely that many County Court judges will regard its findings as a de facto precedent, hence the likelihood of an appeal.

On the other hand, Pranky believes that ParkingEye argued their case in such a way that, if they lose, they will claim that the circumstances of these two cases are different to most of their cases and hence can't set any kind of precedent, de facto or otherwise.

arabesque_101

Thanks bazster.

bazster wrote: »

He has also indicated that, should either party wish to appeal his judgement, since he is the already most senior judge in the County Court, the appeal should go straight to the Appeal Court (a court of record).

OK, so standard County Court cases are normally heard by a District judge. And appeals on decisions by a County Court district judge are normally heard in the County Court by the circuit judge. But in the Cambridge Parking Eye case the circuit judge is hearing a standard case (that wasn't itself the result of an appeal), so if there is an appeal against the circuit judges decision, it has to go to the Court of Appeal. Is that all correct?

bazster

Nearly. I don't think HHJ Moloney said that an appeal definitely would go to the Appeal Court, but it was his desire that it would (and presumably what he wants carries significant weight).