Discussing UK law. Links: swarb.co.uk | law-index | Acts | Members Image galleries

Sir Martin James Moore-Bick

Judicial review, activities of government, local and national etc.

Re: Sir Martin James Moore-Bick

Postby shootist » Thu Jun 29, 2017 2:59 pm

On possibly a slight diversion from the OP, it really grips my excrement when the MSM, and an awful lot of others, speak of a judge 'deciding' to do this or that in a tone that suggests someone asked them a question and they just produced an answer out of thin air. It can be quite eye opening for someone who's never done so to read some of the judgements on BAILII and see the depth of reasoning on precedents and facts which show precisely to the contrary, even if that decision was later appealed. Being called to the bar doesn't mean it's your round.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death my right to be offended by it."
User avatar
shootist
 
Posts: 3539
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 9:40 pm

Re: Sir Martin James Moore-Bick

Postby Russell » Thu Jun 29, 2017 3:57 pm

Nothing to do with this case but I was wondering if a fire was caused by cladding who would be responsible? Manufacturer? Installer/purchaser? Or the people who make the regulations?
If you can't talk about the problem, how are you ever going to even start talking about the solution?
Russell
 
Posts: 1574
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 7:47 pm

Re: Sir Martin James Moore-Bick

Postby Goldensyrup » Thu Jun 29, 2017 4:42 pm

atticus wrote:I have still not seen the case itself; it appears, however, that the decision in question was reversed on appeal.


It was unanimously by the Supreme Court.
Goldensyrup
 
Posts: 225
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 11:52 pm

Re: Sir Martin James Moore-Bick

Postby Hairyloon » Thu Jun 29, 2017 4:51 pm

Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 10016
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Sir Martin James Moore-Bick

Postby shootist » Thu Jun 29, 2017 6:01 pm

Russell wrote:Nothing to do with this case but I was wondering if a fire was caused by cladding who would be responsible? Manufacturer? Installer/purchaser? Or the people who make the regulations?


The lowest person on the hierarchy of all of them who can least afford a decent lawyer I'd guess. As a corollary, I don't think that anyone ever who has made regulations has ever faced responsibility when things go wrong. One of the main purposes of a committee is the avoidance of personalresponsibility for it's members.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death my right to be offended by it."
User avatar
shootist
 
Posts: 3539
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 9:40 pm

Re: Sir Martin James Moore-Bick

Postby Russell » Thu Jun 29, 2017 6:16 pm

All too true. I'd personally hang this on the manufacturer at a guess. If I were to buy something from a shop, I'd be looking to the manufacturer. They are the hands on people who should know and be aware of the limitation of their products. Although, clearly this is more complex than that.
If you can't talk about the problem, how are you ever going to even start talking about the solution?
Russell
 
Posts: 1574
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 7:47 pm

Re: Sir Martin James Moore-Bick

Postby atticus » Thu Jun 29, 2017 6:43 pm

a civil claimant would look for the deepest pockets.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19701
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Sir Martin James Moore-Bick

Postby Hairyloon » Thu Jun 29, 2017 7:59 pm

Russell wrote:All too true. I'd personally hang this on the manufacturer at a guess. If I were to buy something from a shop, I'd be looking to the manufacturer. They are the hands on people who should know and be aware of the limitation of their products. Although, clearly this is more complex than that.


It is not the manufacturer's fault if the product is misused.
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 10016
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Sir Martin James Moore-Bick

Postby atticus » Thu Jun 29, 2017 9:11 pm

A bit simplistic.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19701
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Sir Martin James Moore-Bick

Postby Hairyloon » Thu Jun 29, 2017 9:18 pm

Yes and no.
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 10016
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

PreviousNext

Return to Administrative Law

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron