>> It's a crowd-funded set up to satisfy Jolyon Maugham's self promoting ego. They don't hold
>> Govt. to account, they bring spurious nuisance cases against the Govt.
>> This Govt. badly needs holding to account but Good Law Project is the last bunch
>> of incompetent nutters I want doing it.
That's your view. We differ. Fair enough,
>> Is that supposed to be an excuse or justification for their incompetence?
>> They actually lost out because they couldn't be a***d to either send it by courier
Explanation. Government lawyers plaid, Duke of York style on a technicality. They were aware of the case.
www.lawgazette.co.uk/law/good-law-projects-ppe-claim-fails-after-service-blunder/5109087.article
>> >Defendant states claimant's case contains factual inaccuracy and vice versa
>> >is in 'oodathortit' territory. If all the facts were agreed then the case might be
>> settled...
>>
>> I'm afraid that bit of legal jargon is new to me but as I said:
>> "He's also going to have to explain in court his "factually inaccurate" claims."
They, it's GLP who are the claimant and I don't think JM will be instructed, will have to deal with a defendant who avers their claim to be 'inaccurate'. Mandy Rice Davies applies.
|
