BN66 - the road to Judicial Review

[SantaClaus]

One has to ask, were any of the points listed by Jones brought up in the preceedings by Singh?

If not, they do not form part of the case and he is just scaremongering in only the way a twisted mind can.

[northernSoul]

"The pair were awarded 33,850 euros (£30,400) to cover legal costs. "

You do get costs, but as I understood it, the principles of recovery are a bit mean. In particular the allowable hourly rates are at quite low ceilings (I use the word "low" in the legal sense) so if you pay a good lawyer, you'll almost certainly out of pocket even if you win. For instance, unless the two above in the article you quoted were using lawyers prepared to work for a low fee, (perhaps in order to make a name for themselves) I'd say £30,400 would almost certainly have left them out of pocket. Still - if you lose, you dont have to pay the governments expenses. Generally.

[Fog]

Interesting afternoon

I made the afternoon today. I must say - quite fascinating - and nice to meet more people in the same situation.

Great work by Seadog and Santa for their write up.

My chin is still on the floor in relation to Mr Jones' court room special today and his audacity at responding in such a way on this site. Never felt the need to ignore someone so much in my life.

Going back to the point at hand - our case - I felt it was summed up very well by our chap. We still have a long way to go but a few of us did briefly speak to our legal team who seemed happy with the way things had gone and said so. Still - there is a lot to go through yet and even if we get a decision soon (our legal team seemed to think 3-4 weeks) there will likely be another round or two.

Fog

[Toocan]

Simple observations -

Elgin QC could have done better on the tax - particularly when he "fluffed" the reason why Milne QC thought scheme did not work.

Alan,

Why are you even bothering with this? Have you been stalking Montpelier for eight years?

I don't know what was in the notes your passed to HMRC during the course of the hearing but I suspect they were not to the benefit of anyone here.

If HMRC win this then you will have had your part to play in that. There are around 3,000 people (and their families) involved in this. Where will your victory be then?

From what you've said on here, you have already been damaged by this enought. Let it go. There is nothing here for you.

[Fog]

Alan,


I don't know what was in the notes your passed to HMRC during the course of the hearing but I suspect they were not to the benefit of anyone here.

.

Bollox saw a few of them I think. I am sure he will update soon..... like I just said - he is worth ignoring.

[SantaClaus]

I can't help posting one more line on Jones, and then I will ignore him...

If what Jones has stated in his previous post was so relevant to the case, why wasn't it scribbled on the notes he kept passing to the HMRC stooges and brought up by Singh???

Answers on the back of a postcard please.

[OnYourBikeGB]

Originally Posted by Alan Jones
Simple observations -

Elgin QC could have done better on the tax - particularly when he "fluffed" the reason why Milne QC thought scheme did not work..

Umm, maybe he didn't Alan, maybe Milne just got it wrong. I remember you once claiming to have had a 'good day in court' in one of the earlier cases where MTM took you to the cleaners. Maybe your legal analysis is just not as good as you'd like us to believe.

You're messing with people who are hanging by a thread, you should understand this. Go play elsewhere, you're not wanted.

[silver_lining]

he's probably going to make a dress out of them ala silence of the lambs...he's a psycho remember...

gold

[not-a-penny]

There could be at least two more appeals in the UK before transfer to the Hague court. So it could go on for years.

i suspect best you can get is a declaration of incompatibilty with the ECHR. Then its up to the government to introduce new legisaltion and for parliament to pass it. If it wanted to. In the meantime, if it didn't pursue the case, the "debts" would be quietly forgotten.

Alternatively the government may go all the way to the European Court itself of course, which would likely take another two or three years. And as i think you don't get your costs back from there even if you win(mey be wrong here) Montpelier may just quit.

The way I see it, our best outcome is that we win here, HMRC appeals, come the ellection, this sad bunch is kicked out of office and the new government puts a stop to the legal process thereby saving on Mr Singhs fees and other billions set aside by HMRC for legal costs.

[BrilloPad]

This is why i lost my temper in Court because i have also been looking at the walls of my padded cell for 9 years.

Fixed That for You.

Nurse! More medication for Mr Jones in cell 1 please.

Panel - I ask you - would you trust a certified Looney?