Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

[EXC]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

I didn't get a date but it has been filed.

Just looking at who the Law Lords are.

In order of seniority:

Phillips of Worth Matravers, L. (Senior Lord of Appeal in Ordinary)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4104320.stm

Hoffmann, L. (Second senior Lord of Appeal in Ordinary)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/235456.stm

Hope of Craighead, L.
Saville of Newdigate, L.
Scott of Foscote, L.
Rodger of Earlsferry, L.
Walker of Gestingthorpe, L.
Hale of Richmond, B.
Carswell, L.
Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood, L.
Mance, L.
Neuberger of Abbotsbury, L

[natweststaffmember]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

Lord Hope of Craighead
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_H...e_of_Craighead
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
Lord Saville of Newdigate
Mark Saville, Baron Saville of Newdigate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
Lord Scott of Foscote
Richard Scott, Baron Scott of Foscote - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Ro..._of_Earlsferry
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_..._Gestingthorpe
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
Baroness Hale of Richmond
Brenda Hale, Baroness Hale of Richmond - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
Lord Carswell
Robert Carswell, Baron Carswell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please note he is unlikely to hear the petition as he due for retirement in June 2009
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
Lord Brown of Eaton Under Heywood
Simon Brown, Baron Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
Lord Mance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonatha...e,_Baron_Mance
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia /wiki/David_Neuberger,_Baron_Neuberger_of_Abbotsbury
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
All Oxbridge educated and evenly split...

[natweststaffmember]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

Appeal to be heard and listed for 22nd June 2009 to 24th June 2009. Confirmed this with the listings office at the House of Lords this morning.

[pinknico]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

Was this sooner than expected?

[natweststaffmember]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

Was this sooner than expected?

Not really, I think everyone expected that it would be before the summer recess. I think Amethyst has mentioned that either on this thread or the other one when it was announced that the petition had been granted.

[pinknico]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

"Seems to be six weeks from presentation of appeal to enter statements of appeal - so thats end of May when it will be set down for hearing. Then within 7 days of that they have to give time estimates - THEN the HoL can allocate a hearing date. So will be mid May before we have a hearing date.

3 weeks before the hearing the statements of case etc have to be exchanged then all papers submitted to the house at least 14 days before hearing date. "


This one?

[natweststaffmember]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

Legal Beagles - View Single Post - House of Lords: banks given leave to appeal
I think it is this post I was referring to.

[EXC]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

Well done Nat.

I would hope that judgments could be considered during the sitting recess as with the High Court. I would assume judgment wouldn't be handed down until they return. I certainly don't think it's impossible that we'll have the judgment before the end of July.

If the HoLs follows the judicial term calendar they'll break up 31 July and return on 1 October.

This will put some pressure on the OFT to finalise their view on fairness without leaving too much of a gap.

[EXC]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

Forget my last post.

HoLs Judges don't consider or hand down judgments during recess.

They break up on 31 July and in fact don't return as after 133 years they start in the new Supreme Court on . The HoLs will be hearing appeals right up to the end of July so there will be judgments pending that will be handed down in the SC when it starts.

Contrary to what they state on the site I was also told that judgments actually take 6 to 8 sitting weeks so it's unlikely we'll get judgment before October.

[Amethyst]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

Date set for House of Lords bank charges appeal

Monday, 20 Apr 2009 16:15


The House of Lords has set a date to hear the banks' appeal against the Office of Fair Trading's (OFT) overdraft charges for June 22nd.

The date is slightly earlier than campaigners were expecting, as the banks still had time to make their petition.

However, customers hoping to reclaim overdraft charges from their banks if the OFT wins will still have some time to wait, Julian Siddle from consumer champion site Legal Beagleshas warned.

"There's always the possibility they could launch another appeal to the European courts," Mr Siddle said, as the European Court of Justice is the last place they could take their appeal.

However, even if the OFT wins at the House of Lords and the banks accept the decision, there is still further legal wrangling to go through before customers will see any cash.

"The main question we get is 'when will we get paid?'" Mr Siddle said.

"But it is a lot more complex than that. If the House of Lords upholds the judgement and the banks do not take it any further, it will have to go back to the courts to decide what is a fair charge.

"Only a court can decide that, the OFT can't," Mr Siddle said.

"I think we are still looking at 2010."

A group of banks is fighting the OFT's claim that it has the right to decide if bank charges are unfair. If the OFT wins, it is widely expected to judge the charges unfair and demand banks pay back billions of pounds to customers.

http://myfinances.co.uk/news/bank-accounts/bank-charges/date-set-house-lords-bank-charges-appeal-$1289351.htm

[Amethyst]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

Will they hand down in Supreme Court if it goes past 31 July.

Maybe they will turn it round quickly and get it out before recess

[EXC]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

Will they hand down in Supreme Court if it goes past 31 July.

Yes. Be quite good to see both courts though. To be honest I don't think we would have the OFT's view on fairness any sooner and it kind of gives the OFT October or September to aim at.

[Amethyst]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

Summer recess is only 3 days?

The Guildhall is being renovated for use as a Supreme Court and is due to open at the start of the legal year in October 2009.

[enaid]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

Well will it be same judges in the new Supreme Court ?
It won't be a case of new ones reading through everything will it?

[natweststaffmember]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

I suspect that the cases already being dealt with by the HoL will be allowed to progress and only petitions made after the date that the new supreme court is opened will be heard by the supreme court. There is likely to be a crossover of cases with the Law Lords and the new supreme court.
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
Scrap that. the first 12 judges are the current ones from the HoL
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
source: Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (c. 4)

• Single Page Version
• 
  

"23 The Supreme Court

(1) There is to be a Supreme Court of the United Kingdom.
(2) The Court consists of 12 judges appointed by Her Majesty by letters patent.
(3) Her Majesty may from time to time by Order in Council amend subsection (2) so as to increase or further increase the number of judges of the Court.
(4) No recommendation may be made to Her Majesty in Council to make an Order under subsection (3) unless a draft of the Order has been laid before and approved by resolution of each House of Parliament.
(5) Her Majesty may by letters patent appoint one of the judges to be President and one to be Deputy President of the Court.
(6) The judges other than the President and Deputy President are to be styled “Justices of the Supreme Court”.
(7) The Court is to be taken to be duly constituted despite any vacancy among the judges of the Court or in the office of President or Deputy President.
24 First members of the Court

On the commencement of section 23—
(a) the persons who immediately before that commencement are Lords of Appeal in Ordinary become judges of the Supreme Court,
(b) the person who immediately before that commencement is the senior Lord of Appeal in Ordinary becomes the President of the Court, and
(c) the person who immediately before that commencement is the second senior Lord of Appeal in Ordinary becomes the Deputy President of the Court."