Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 (Pt 2)

[UnitedFront]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 (Pt 2)

Inviting comments, in an open forum? Surely not.

On a serious note though, I'm not sure there is any point in nonsensical backslapping and "hoorahs" when your home is at risk - and there is not a shred of information in this thread that can help you!

The simple fact is that even the worst of law students would understand that your case is hopeless. It is simply doomed to fail. You cannot win.

The danger, I fear, is that you are going to end up in a worse position than that in which you currently find yourself.

Someone has to try and inject some sense into this otherwise ridiculous thread.

I think you would do well to at least figure out an answer to the following questions before you go back to court.

How can the Magna Carta impliedly repeal something in the year 2002?
How can an Act passed in the 1980's not impliedly repeal the Magna Carta?

[Guest]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 (Pt 2)

Inviting comments, in an open forum? Surely not.

How can the Magna Carta impliedly repeal something in the year 2002?
How can an Act passed in the 1980's not impliedly repeal the Magna Carta?

BA HA!!!
The last time I had a magnum, it came out as a pint of ale, mate!

1. Because that year it became constitutional statute.
2. It could, until 2002, when the Dark Chocolate Magnum became incapable of implied repeal.

Dear me...

[Guest]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 (Pt 2)

on a serious note though, i'm not sure there is any point in nonsensical backslapping and "hoorahs" when your home is at risk

Ha ha haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!
No, you're right <cough>

[IanM]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 (Pt 2)

You have some issues you need help with that no forum in the land can give!


1. How can the Magna Carta impliedly repeal something in the year 2002?
2. How can an Act passed in the 1980's not impliedly repeal the Magna Carta?


'I am not a lawyer' but as most Law is 'interpretation' i would say in reply to:

Q.1. that the Magna Carta cannot possibly know what laws are going to be made in the future so would not be able to repeal something that has yet to happen.

As for Q.2. I have an idea but not 100% sure.................. but i'm sure my idea of what it is, is nowhere near as stupid as yours sounds!

BA HA!!!
The last time I had a magnum, it came out as a pint of ale, mate!

1. Because that year it became constitutional statute.
2. It could, until 2002, when the Dark Chocolate Magnum became incapable of implied repeal.

Dear me...

[Guest]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 (Pt 2)

I have an idea but not 100% sure

No-one has been sure of anything since Noah set foot on dry land, dear.

[Guest]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 (Pt 2)

the Magna Carta cannot possibly know what laws are going to be made in the future

No, but it presupposes they're stupid! AH HA!!!

[IanM]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 (Pt 2)

No, but it presupposes they're stupid! AH HA!!!

So i take it that if i read the Magna Carta all the way through i will repeatedly find your name?

[Guest]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 (Pt 2)

So i take it that if i read the Magna Carta all the way through i will repeatedly find your name?

YEP - Rrrrrollin in the deep!!!
Stamped it wiv sum funny wax and ate it :couch2:

Oh look, repealed s21 notice, repealed s21 notice!!! :target:I am a fire starter!! I am a fire starter!!!
Henry VIIIth will eat you for breakfast :smash::fencing:

Oh look, there's a judge :focus:

Ahhhhh............... :bathbaby:

Your mother needs you :cell:

[UnitedFront]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 (Pt 2)

@Christianpassy

I understand that you don't want to lose the home in which you live. I understand also that you are clutching at straws to prevent the loss of the aforementioned home.

However, you cannot continue to ignore what are fairly basic flaws in both your knowledge and your case.

You say that the magna carta "became" a constitutional statute in 2002?

• I assume you are referring to some comments made by Lord Justice Laws (or some other such figure) that were made in around 2002, to the effect that constitutional statutes cannot be impliedly repealed.
• The Magna Carta didn't BECOME a constitutional statute in 2002. Nothing special happened in this year, other than the Queen's jubilee.
• Vast amounts of the Magna Carta have been repealed over the years.
• Nothing that is still in force helps your case, so far as I can see. This is for the reasons I posted before - you simply don't fall within the scope of the section you quoted.

You cannot keep burying your head in the sand and you cannot keep simply insulting those that actually have some constructive truths to tell you. Your case is useless, no good, dead in the water, not alive any more, deceased, gone to the graveyard in the sky, it doesn't make any sense, it doesn't stand up to even a tiny amount of scrutiny, it can't win, it won't win, you might well end up owing more money that you do now and still not have a house to live in.

Unfortunately, from some of your above posts, I fear that you might do well to make an appointment to see a doctor? An objective observer would be quite worried about your mental health.

For my part, I hope you get help.

[Guest]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 (Pt 2)

"In my opinion a constitutional statute is one which:-
(a) conditions the legal relationship between citizen and State in some general, overarching manner, or
(b) enlarges or diminishes the scope of...fundamental constitutional rights"

Strictly speaking, this point was not essential to the decision, and so can be classified as obiter dicta, but the point has not thus far been disavowed by other English Judges, or, on the other hand, given much amplification in subsequent case.

"statements constituting obiter dicta are therefore not binding, although in some jurisdictions, such as England and Wales, they can be strongly persuasive. An example of an instance where a court opinion may include obiter dicta is where a court rules that it lacks jurisdiction to hear a case or dismisses the case on a technicality. If the court in such a case offers opinions on the merits of the case, such opinions may constitute obiter dicta.

[enaid]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 (Pt 2)

Hello CP,
I will say you have alienated quite a few on here with your, shall we say off the wall humour. I do hope you have taken any proper advice that has been given and accepted that's probably the best we can do for you on here. I personally hope you do not lose your home, I hope you do find a solution.
Just wishing you all the best
Enaid x

[UnitedFront]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 (Pt 2)

@Christianpassy

The Magna Carta might well be a constitutional statute. There is at least one twentieth century statute that almost certainly has such a status (European Communities Act). BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH YOUR CASE!!

Please, I beg that you try to actually focus. You can't carry on just finding random information and trying to bend it to your will so as to make it somehow relevant to your case - it isn't!!!

Please can you tell us how the Magna Carta is relevant to your specific circumstances???

Also, over the last years, the issue (constitutional statutes) has been much debated. Wiki-crap is not a useful source of information. Invest in a library card and read some proper textbooks - you might learn something!!

[Guest]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 (Pt 2)

First the basics, UnitedFront.
Ref #55, according to Lord Justice John Laws' passing remarks on Monday 18th February 2002 (#55),
all three of the following could be considered constitutional statute:
The Magna Carta 1225, s21(4)(a) of the Housing Act 1988, and the Human Rights Act 1998.

All three condition the legal relationship between citizen and State in some 'general, overarching manner'.
MC 1297 lays down, s21(4)(a) HA 1988 lays down/diminishes and HRA 1998 (as of 2000) enlarges, some fundamental rights.

Update: see #67 for a discussion of why s21(4)(a) HA 1988 is not constitutional statute.

The implied statement of the DDJ, and express statement of the DJ, was that these rights need not be balanced.
Yet if all three are 'constitutional', they all hold equal weight in law.

Here lies one error in law the judges may have made (I await the transcript to comment further):
At this point it is believed DJ argued that private landlords don't have responsibility to protect the human rights of tenants.
He's quite right - in my case, he had that responsibility.
DJ's blinding moment was the description of the AST.
A PERMANENT WALKING AGREEMENT to violation of constitutional rights.
All the more reason for a considered application of my rights - which, however, expressly did not happen.

My clairvoyance and Wikipedia v DJ Unnamed - currently, Wiki and I are ahead, because CJ thus far agrees with me.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may have to defer the title & insignia, 'Devil's Advocate :mad2:' to my friend, UnitedFront, for the time being.
s21 Firestarter :target:will get to the Dark Chocolate Magnum. My fire wins over all I scream.

[Guest]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 (Pt 2)

Thankyou for your remarks, enaid.
Best wishes.

[Guest]

Re: Private tenants can use human rights to prevent s21 (Pt 2)

Invest in a library card and read some proper textbooks - you might learn something!!

Somebody else has already done this for me - the barrister.
There is no point trying to catch up, because he's one of the highest authorities in the land.