I SUSPECT with the government but with some kind of footnote in the ruling that he abused power; though I didn't expect this ruling today, so I really have no idea in reality. Flip a coin.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
I SUSPECT with the government but with some kind of footnote in the ruling that he abused power; though I didn't expect this ruling today, so I really have no idea in reality. Flip a coin.
Unsure if you're being deliberately obtuse here or are just absolutely clueless yet running your mouth. I suspect the former, but will explain as if it's the latter and you are some toddler that is incapable of using google.
The Scottish courts are split into 2 sections. Ditto to tribunals. One handles Scottish matters, and the other (Under the authority of the Court of Session) matters for the whole UK. These decisions can be appealed to the Court of session. They can then be appealed to the UK supreme court if the court allows leave to appeal. I'll even draw you a nice 'WensleyMU friendly chart.'
Very funny. However it still appears to be incorrect.
You are right that Scottish courts are split, however your reasons are wrong. There are criminal and civil courts, you know, like most countries.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...Vaw0vj33rYvrbt_lgOaqpjQWF&cshid=1568211268954
The above PDF gives some information, but this case is extremely unique so information is not easy to come by.
Thanks though for the cat image, I am now focused and ready.
Unsure if you're being deliberately obtuse here or are just absolutely clueless yet running your mouth. I suspect the former, but will explain as if it's the latter and you are some toddler that is incapable of using google.
The Scottish courts are split into 2 sections. Ditto to tribunals. One handles Scottish matters, and the other (Under the authority of the Court of Session) matters for the whole UK. These decisions can be appealed to the Court of session. They can then be appealed to the UK supreme court if the court allows leave to appeal. I'll even draw you a nice 'WensleyMU friendly chart.'
Ouch!That's not what my Lib Dem friends tell me, in particular the left leaning ones, they suggest if Labour gets its act together on Brexit a number of traditional Lib Dem's could vote for them. In other words Swinson may attract some disaffected Remainer Tories to go along with their new carpet-baggers ex-MP's; however they may lose a lot of traditional members from the old Liberal wing of the party.
The same people tell me they think Swinson was a big mistake, but how they get rid of her they don't seem too sure!
Fair play mate!Well doneUnsure if you're being deliberately obtuse here or are just absolutely clueless yet running your mouth. I suspect the former, but will explain as if it's the latter and you are some toddler that is incapable of using google.
The Scottish courts are split into 2 sections. Ditto to tribunals. One handles Scottish matters, and the other (Under the authority of the Court of Session) matters for the whole UK. These decisions can be appealed to the Court of session. They can then be appealed to the UK supreme court if the court allows leave to appeal. I'll even draw you a nice 'WensleyMU friendly chart.'
Either way, BoJo certainly has a strongly galvanising effect on parliament to prevent his madness. If he comes up with something even madder, parliament might just end up with a sane outcome to all this in the end.
Yes, we're discussing civil courts obviously. The Court of Session is the top civil court. Refer back to the chart. It has the 2 forms of civil courts that have UK wide jurisdiction on the top. Hence the tribunals run by 'Her Majestys Courts and Tribunal Service.' and all civil matters end in the CoS. It also says about 5 times on the pdf you linked that appeals go to the UK Supreme Court. It's a constitutional issue, not a devolution one, so where is the complexity?
Surely in this election climate that's a good thing, siphoning of the conservative vote whilst leaving the labour one alone?
This is what the Leave campaign should've sounded like - if they'd been truthful.
I do wonder if he is capable of all this. He's such a baboon. Its certainly feasible that he is a puppet to Cummings / extreme right of the tory party.
Actually that is an even scarier thought.
Unsure if you're being deliberately obtuse here or are just absolutely clueless yet running your mouth. I suspect the former, but will explain as if it's the latter and you are some toddler that is incapable of using google.
The Scottish courts are split into 2 sections. Ditto to tribunals. One handles Scottish matters, and the other (Under the authority of the Court of Session) matters for the whole UK. These decisions can be appealed to the Court of session. They can then be appealed to the UK supreme court if the court allows leave to appeal. I'll even draw you a nice 'WensleyMU friendly chart.'
I like your style.
Absolute disaster for Johnson personally this, not just the Tories. 1st time a court has ruled that a PM has misled the Queen/King. Impeachable, and many argue could be high treason. I would expect the Supreme Court to over rule though, as the Scottish court ruled different to the London court due to their different Scot Law. However, effectively Parliament was never now prorogued, and unless the Govt applies for a stay of that decision, if they don't re-open Parliament they could be held in contempt of Court too. Stakes have just gone radically higher, for Johnson, and also for the Privy Counsellors too, with personal liability potentially.
As I understand it not for the hard core (old) Liberals its not, after the coalition cock-up they do not want anything to do with Tories, including their cast off MP's! One of my Lib Dem friends told me his nightmare was that come the GE the Lib Dems finished up with less seats than they had now and almost half of them were ex-tory MP's who had jumped ship because Swinson had given them preference on selection over existing Lib Dem candidates in seats where they believed they could win over disaffected Tories.
He tells me he and his pals are seeking to raise this at the Lib-Dem conference, hence that's why I asked if Swinson would still be party leader after the Conference? My pal is very worked up about this, but how many others in the party feel the same way I don't know. This friend has been in the Liberal Party and now the Lib Dems for over 40 years and is an ardent remainer, but I've never seen him so worked up about anything since Clegg reneged on his Tuition fee promise!
It now seems all the major parties might be in danger of tearing themselves apart, should be a lively Conference season!
I don't really see why the select committees couldn't just sit today. Is anything really stopping them?
I don't know how UK calculate the expats but in Spain, those over 100.000 are the ones that volunteerly registered in the spanish embassy/consulates. For example, I have been living in canada over 3 years and as I am lazy and didn't register, I don't count as expat/immigrant in Canada. And I never did when I lived 1 year an a half in Scotland. Currently, No more than 5 of my 30-40 group of friends that had been over a year did registered as well. and usually my circle of friends in any of the countries that I live, rarely register
The estimations that I read are that are over 300.000. And estimations might be wrong and maybe the UK has the same system and the brittish are even more, so I will not dispute your correction
Over 120.000 brittish living in spain, are over 65 years, that don't contribute to the workforce and are a burden to our health care system
UK paid 285 millions to spain for the medical bill for his expats/immigrants in Spain and Spain paid the UK 150.000. That is the level of utilization of the health care systems, a time on the waiting list that would recover.
And that is only Spain.
In general UK imports workforce, much more valuable and exports retirees, usually a burden and if you complain of the stress that the NHS is suffering, I would not like to see if they would need to come back + losing the workforce that pays the taxes for the NHS
Jokes on them because there won't be any NHS by the time they come back.
How so? I've not read the full decision, so apologies if I'm ignorant here. Didn't realise it was even released yet.
And yes, Impeachment will be parliaments stick. Was going to be already though. I've argued for quite a few days that he's sailing close to treason.
ps. As far as I'm aware the court didn't issue any particular writ, and pretty much said 'Let it now go to the Supreme Court to decide.'
Parliament is prorogued! They can't.
Ah fair enough; those were just the numbers I recall, I couldn’t tell you how they arrived at them without looking it back up but you saying registered at the consulate rings a bell. So you could very well be right with the estimations being much higher of people who aren’t registered.
But yeah in general I get what you’re saying and you’re right. We import more valuable immigrants, and export less valuable ones. Another reason why net immigration is good for the UK and why Brexit will be bad for us!
On to next Tuesday then. I would be astonished in the supreme court did not rule with the Government (with some caustic criticism no doubt) but today's outcome was a huge shock, so who knows.
And just when you think things couldn't get even more ricockulous
https://inews.co.uk/news/brexit/bor...ireland-scotland-brexit-backstop-issue-plans/
And if you're thinking to yourself is this as stupid as it sounds then yes, yes it is...
https://inews.co.uk/news/brexit/bor...ireland-scotland-brexit-backstop-issue-plans/
And if you're thinking to yourself is this as stupid as it sounds then yes, yes it is...
That is just incredible. He is making an utter fool of himself.
We don't yet have a dual carriage way to Coleraine despite it being talked about for 50 years - we have the worst infrastructure in the UK by FAR and this is what they are going to waste billions on? A bridge that is probably impossible to build and that will be closed 3/4 of the year due to weather conditions. Absolute genius.
I know it's brilliant isn't it. The Orwell Bridge here get's closed every time there's a stiff breeze.
Why not a tunnel like the channel tunnel?
Maybe you can use the parts from it to build from NI > Scotland instead once you leave the EU.
Maybe you can use the parts from it to build from NI > Scotland instead once you leave the EU.
It is a virtual engineering impossibility and completely unaffordable anyway but, yes, it'd be shut for half the year (of course it'd take a century to build as if weather shuts a bridge for driving, I imagine it somewhat curtails building 1.5 km supports in a sea on a platform of live munitions)
Despite racist and xenophoic rethoric, workforce immigration is always good for any society. You get people that you didn't spend a dime on public education, healthy that does not suppose a burden for the NHS, raise the birth rate and contributes in taxes. Of course it brings some strains with it like any large phenomena impossible to control 100% but the negatives are larger overcomed by the positives. The problem is that racism populism focus on those strains/negatives to blame all the problems
But if some of them are worried of purity of race and who is going to feck his wife, then Is another matter.
All and all, brittish retirees shouldn't be a problem for a big economy like in Spain. Just splitting hairs
At which point Boris reveals this was his plan all along - to unite the government and the country. Greatest PM in history.
Yes, yes but apart from that it's a fantastic idea. Let's be positive shall we?
Nonsense you negative stinker thinker. We simply need to put Chris Grayling in charge of project management and look at the positives of Brexit instead of the negatives. The rising sea levels from the environmental protections we plan to trash will be absolutely offset by the fantastic fracking work we will be doing to shift the tectonic plates. Our fantastic scientists and engineers will then get on this this amazing opportunity and make it work. Just look at how HS2 has worked out. A small bridge in stormy conditions and 1000ft deep water will be no problem.
And if it all fails, Chris can just get Seabourne freight on the hotline to transport the passengers.
Oh I am no expert, just struggling to keep up with the developments. https://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2019/...gh-court-of-england-and-wales-begs-to-differ/ Looks like a good summation?
That is what I was thinking. tunnel would be shorter but deeper (In Japan there is one almost as deep).
But is not the same as linking to cities as London and Paris (and basically mainland Europe and UK) while Scotland and Ireland would be way less attractive economically speaking
I was thinking that myself earlier. And then rips off a mask, Scooby Doo style to reveal...The issue is that Scots Law doesn't always apply to the UK.
However after much checking, it appears that the supreme court will rule whether the Scottish court applied Scots Law correctly, not whether Johnson acted illegally.
I suspect they will rule in favour.
The issue then may be that they could rule in favour of the Scottish courts, but against Gina Miller's case. Although I had seen some state that the supreme court will see these cases together, as one.
If it takes the appeals separately, but on the same day, could it be ruled that he acted both legally and illegally, depending on the judgement.
Right now we already have one court saying he did act legally, while another says he didn't, which overruled a lower court which also said he did.
This must be a stupid question as no one else has asked but why would a bridge help the backstop issue?
Surely it just makes it worse
Surely it just makes it worse
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/court-challenges-prorogation
"
Didn’t the English High Court already rule that the prorogation was lawful?
Yes. The English High Court ruled that, according to English and Welsh public law, the prorogation was lawful. The High Court said that the question of whether the government had left MPs sufficient time to hold the executive to account was a political question, which could not be decided by the court.
However, the Scottish Court of session does not apply English and Welsh public law. It applies Scots public law, and was not bound by the decision of the High Court. The Scottish Court of Session ruled that, according to Scottish public law, the prorogation was unlawful."
Does the court’s ruling mean that Parliament is in session after all?
Because the summary of the court’s judgment says that the prorogation was “null and of no effect”, the challengers say that Parliament was never prorogued at all. However, it appears that the court has only said that it “will” make such an order to that effect, and has not yet actually made the order. This may be because the Supreme Court is due to hear an appeal on Tuesday.
Therefore, it appears for now that Parliament is still prorogued.
However, the Court of Session has said that the prorogation was unlawful even if it has not made the order. The government normally responds to legal judgments against it by taking steps to bring itself into compliance with the law. For that reason, the Labour Party has called on the government to recall Parliament immediately. The government has reportedly said that it will await the Supreme Court’s judgment."
"
Didn’t the English High Court already rule that the prorogation was lawful?
Yes. The English High Court ruled that, according to English and Welsh public law, the prorogation was lawful. The High Court said that the question of whether the government had left MPs sufficient time to hold the executive to account was a political question, which could not be decided by the court.
However, the Scottish Court of session does not apply English and Welsh public law. It applies Scots public law, and was not bound by the decision of the High Court. The Scottish Court of Session ruled that, according to Scottish public law, the prorogation was unlawful."
Does the court’s ruling mean that Parliament is in session after all?
Because the summary of the court’s judgment says that the prorogation was “null and of no effect”, the challengers say that Parliament was never prorogued at all. However, it appears that the court has only said that it “will” make such an order to that effect, and has not yet actually made the order. This may be because the Supreme Court is due to hear an appeal on Tuesday.
Therefore, it appears for now that Parliament is still prorogued.
However, the Court of Session has said that the prorogation was unlawful even if it has not made the order. The government normally responds to legal judgments against it by taking steps to bring itself into compliance with the law. For that reason, the Labour Party has called on the government to recall Parliament immediately. The government has reportedly said that it will await the Supreme Court’s judgment."
That helps in the same way putting hazards on at a junction let's people know which way you are turning
.What a mess this is.
Well it does nothing to solve it and I guess it makes it worse in the sense that instead of one land border you would now have kinda 2 - although there would surely have to be some sort of checks at the end of the bridge - you can imagine how that traffic jam will look - would'nt fancy to be on a big truck full of goods stuck on the middle of that bridge for hours knowing that there is unexploded munitions somewhere beneath me and that at any point the bridge could be closed due to high winds.
Sounds fantastic if you ask me.
I *think* (and this is by no means conclusive or authoritative) that the lower courts will always rule 'non justiciable' and then hand it upstairs until it reaches the Supreme Court in almost all circumstances. Note how they handed it up to the SC not the CoA.
I don't see anything in that blog to suggest 'Scottish Law' was different, just that the 3 justices in the CoS decided that it was justiciable, and the High Court ones decided it was not so.
I did feel the SC would reject it, but I'm now totally unsure. Somebody asked earlier; I said 'flip a coin.' I do feel the grounds for impeachment are lower though; any judicial rebuke can be used against him.
This is simple obfuscation unfortunately. It is not about 'whose' law it applies; the law is the same in this instance. It was simply started in the Scottish courts as the English ones were on holiday that day. The tests are the same in both jurisdictions. It may be simply making the point that the CoS isn't bound by the high court ruling though.
To the 2nd yes, no writ was issued. They just sent it over to the SC.