Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Sun Mar 29, 2020 08:56

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 14:21 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
It strikes me that if Ed O'Brain lost on appeal the results would be catastrophic.

After an appeal lose, case law might effectively require cyclists to use cycle lanes when they exist, possibly irrespective of condition. Everyone with a brain (!) should appreciate that such a ruling would be a disaster.

It's POSSIBLE that winning on appeal would set the opposite (proper) precedent, but since it is a very important matter, I think the defence team should consider extremely carefully if this case is the right case to appeal.

On this sole basis I question the wisdom of appealing this particular case. If there are any significant doubts about winning it'd be better not appealed.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 15:12 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2006 15:33
Posts: 25
An appeal at this stage will not set precedent.

_________________
It's not what you ride... it's how you ride it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 16:09 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
ed_o_brain wrote:
An appeal at this stage will not set precedent.


Crown court rulings set persuasive precedent rather than binding precedent, I think. Can anyone clarify that please?

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 00:05 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 21:41
Posts: 3608
Location: North West
In this family - is indeed a case of "Ask The Family" :lol:


Magistrates Courts are the first point of call - and they have to refer to Crown and County Courts for serious hearings or sentences beyond their authority.

Anyway per the accountants (Willi and his pal Bob) and the lawyers (Siegli and Andreas) - the nature of binding precedent is a special feature of UK common law jurisdiction. The doctrine is based on

book on Law (Business and General) which you can find in any bookseller to verify us (Swiss guys in e-mail to me) and a similar book for the medical profession wrote:

The doctrine of precedent is based on the general principle that once a court has stated the legal position in a given situation, hence the same decision will be reached in any future case where the material facts are the same


Andreas has told me he knows of a precedential case regarding use or non-use :wink: of cycle lane which he would have used - had he been defending Ed. Andreas is not based in Shropshire though. :roll: :wink:

However, per all the law books from legal/police to business to medicine in the chapters in which they discuss the "sources of law" - it says that whether a court is bound to follow a previous decision depends on which court gave this decision

If a superior court ruled - then all courts below are bound to abide by the ruled precedent. A superior court is not bound by the findings of a lower one. Why Appeal Court can over-ride the lower courts and why House of Lords can kick the Appeal Court into touch :wink: as I understand this .. :wink:

Per the Law Books - all of them from my mecdical ones to Willi's Accountancy ones, IG's Plod ones and the ones used by that rogue Andreas


Quote:

1. Decisions from the House of Lords bind all other courts for the future and until 1966 were even binding on the House itself :? :shock: Lord Chancellor of the day ruled that by rigidly binding the House - we stunted development and justice.

2. Court of Appeal is bound by previous decisions of the House of Lords and by its own decisions House of Lords is not bound by the Appeal Court's decision.

3. A High Court judge is bound by the decisions of the Appeal Court and the House of Lords bit not by other High Court decisions

4. A County Court judge is bound by all decisions by the higher courts


This does not mean that higher courts disregard the findings of the lower courts/ Not binding but persuasive

If the person appeals to the Higher Court - and succeeds - then this reverses the precedent set by the lower courts. If a court hears a similar case - then the higher court's precedential decision would over-rule the previous decisions. [/quote

So - as I understand from asking the family :wink:

The decision could stand - but a brief who has done
his homework would know that the decision was no longer binding on the court as it has been superseded :wink:

A higher court can "disapprove" as cast doubt on the correctness of the lower court's decision as well as "distinguish" certain variances on the similar but not identical facts before it.

Hmmmm! not so clear cut or so black and white :scratchchin:

I misread Andreas's mail to me. I confused his "civil" with his "criminal". He does say that a criminal case may indeed re- hear the case presented in the Crown Court and will also question the decision as based on the finding of fact as presented at the original case.

If the judge did not judge on the finding of fact.. then Ed.. you may indeed have a good ground for appeal. DO check all this with your own legal rep and if you do appeal - all the best and keep us posted as far as you can under sub-judice rulings. We can only try to offer support, solace, some comfort and a shoulder to cry on. But - hey - better than you thought from us :wink: :wink: :lol:

As said - we are far from being speeding rebels (and yeah - I admit - love my car and love to drive fast if I can do so legally in Germany and on track - but never in an urban or busy busy setting) - we want fair play for all ... including those who ride bikes. We all have a (privileged) right to use the roads - and by "privileged right" - I mean a right so long as we all keep to C-ourtesy - OAST rules
:wink:

Thus - we all have a right to use any road - and we all share and negotiate our safe progress

But basically - we want to see fair play and we ain't at all sure you got fair play on this based on what you say. I am sure you are aware that we got a bare bone account from C+ paragraph - and had to speculate as to why they went that far.

But do keep us informed and we will give a sympathetic ear to you and try to offer comfort and some help.

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !

But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.850s | 14 Queries | GZIP : Off ]