Archived posts split from template defence thread

KeithP

suomi_stokr said:

can any supporting evidence be added to the defense template (e.g. photos of the site, signage, videos) when filling in point 3 of Facts known to defendant? if so, how does one go on about doing that? can we cite exhibit 1, 2 etc? 

Your question is best asked on your thread.
But just to quickly say - no evidence gets filed with a Defence.

Coupon-mad

suomi_stokr said:

can any supporting evidence be added to the defense template (e.g. photos of the site, signage, videos) when filling in point 3 of Facts known to defendant? if so, how does one go on about doing that? can we cite exhibit 1, 2 etc? 

No. Evidence comes much later.

All stages are explained in the NEWBIES thread. Please don't only read this thread.  There's more to it than defence stage.

deficit

The DLUHC Parking Code Of Practice 2022 is potentially very useful to me as it specifically references my situation in one of its annexes, but I can see no reference online stating that it is now 'live' after being temporarily withdrawn.  Its status is still shown as 'temporarily withdrawn' on the government website.  What basis do we have, per paragraph 10 of the template defence, for saying it is now 'live'?

Jenni_D

None - yet. There have been several "consultations" in the intervening period, but things should hopefully progress soon. @Coupon-mad is "in the know" about this.  

Coupon-mad

deficit said:

The DLUHC Parking Code Of Practice 2022 is potentially very useful to me as it specifically references my situation in one of its annexes, but I can see no reference online stating that it is now 'live' after being temporarily withdrawn.  Its status is still shown as 'temporarily withdrawn' on the government website.  What basis do we have, per paragraph 10 of the template defence, for saying it is now 'live'?

Because it's had life breathed back into it by the DLUHC's Draft IA in the Summer, and the next stage will be the final IA and Public Consultation. expected soon.

It's not dead.  Therefore it is 'live'; just not finalised quite yet. Look:

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8736/

LordWinterbottom

Coupon-mad said:

deficit said:

The DLUHC Parking Code Of Practice 2022 is potentially very useful to me as it specifically references my situation in one of its annexes, but I can see no reference online stating that it is now 'live' after being temporarily withdrawn.  Its status is still shown as 'temporarily withdrawn' on the government website.  What basis do we have, per paragraph 10 of the template defence, for saying it is now 'live'?

Because it's had life breathed back into it by the DLUHC's Draft IA in the Summer, and the next stage will be the final IA and Public Consultation. expected soon.

It's not dead.  Therefore it is 'live'; just not finalised quite yet. Look:

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8736/

In PE's defense (Oct 2023) they say the  'Code of Practice is not currently active and therefore any reference to this should be disregarded'.  How best approach this in the WS? Is a Judge likely to agree with PE?

KeithP

LordWinterbottom said:

Coupon-mad said:

deficit said:

The DLUHC Parking Code Of Practice 2022 is potentially very useful to me as it specifically references my situation in one of its annexes, but I can see no reference online stating that it is now 'live' after being temporarily withdrawn.  Its status is still shown as 'temporarily withdrawn' on the government website.  What basis do we have, per paragraph 10 of the template defence, for saying it is now 'live'?

Because it's had life breathed back into it by the DLUHC's Draft IA in the Summer, and the next stage will be the final IA and Public Consultation. expected soon.

It's not dead.  Therefore it is 'live'; just not finalised quite yet. Look:

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8736/

In PE's defense (Oct 2023) they say the  'Code of Practice is not currently active and therefore any reference to this should be disregarded'.  How best approach this in the WS? Is a Judge likely to agree with PE?

That's a question for your thread, isn't it?

deficit

In the template defence it says to add that you were driving to paragraph 2 if you were driving.  However, if the defendant has delined to say who was driving throughout the process so far, then I do not believe this needs to change at Defence stage.  Can this be clarified?

Jenni_D

If your defence hinges on PoFA and no keeper liability, then you'll have to make that decision for yourself. The question you need to ask yourself is ... if the judge asks me if I was driving, how am I going to answer that question without a) wrecking my defence and b) peeing off the judge?

Coupon-mad

deficit said:

In the template defence it says to add that you were dirving to paragraph 2 if you were driving.  However, if the defendant has delined to say who was driving throughout the process so far, then I do not believe this needs to change at Defence stage.  Can this be clarified?

In my experience of Judges, it is best to take the honest stance if the case is likely to go to a hearing and you were driving.

A Judge only has to ask 'were you driving?' to blow apart a defence that hangs its hat too much on the POFA. Most people won't cope well in court if they start the hearing on the back foot with an angry Judge wondering if they can believe you as a witness.  And most people at a hearing would be far, far more comfortable talking openly about what went wrong and how crap the signs are. 

So I stand by that basic advice.

That's not to say that some cases are best relying in the POFA. A canny Defendant can work out what's their best suit.