Re: Appeals - Days 1, 2, 3 and 4... so far
In the judgment for the initial test case hearing, 4 banks (Abbey, Barclays, Clydesdale & HBOS) were found to have certain terms & conditions that were not in 'plain intelligible language' as UTCCR holds they should be.
See the very last paragraph (no 450) http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/docs/jud...ent_240408.pdf
At the handing down of that judgment the banks sought permission to appeal but Justice Smith declined to give it. In the appeal hearing just finished the 4 banks re-applied for permission to appeal the PIL judgment and the judges granted it. This will mean that another appeal hearing will be scheduled to hear it.
In the judgment for the initial test case hearing, 4 banks (Abbey, Barclays, Clydesdale & HBOS) were found to have certain terms & conditions that were not in 'plain intelligible language' as UTCCR holds they should be.
See the very last paragraph (no 450) http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/docs/jud...ent_240408.pdf
At the handing down of that judgment the banks sought permission to appeal but Justice Smith declined to give it. In the appeal hearing just finished the 4 banks re-applied for permission to appeal the PIL judgment and the judges granted it. This will mean that another appeal hearing will be scheduled to hear it.
Comment