Tweet
Apologies for not posting sooner.....its been a very busy day!
I arrived at the bunker shortly after 12. It was a great set up, even if it did look like there had been a stampede in there. Lap tops, clothes and coffee cups everywhere!
EXC, Tom Brennan, Phil and Stephen arrived shortly after one. We ordered lunch and discussed the events of the morning.
The overall impression is that we have a GOOD JUDGE! He wasn't at all overwhelmed by the vast array of legal elite representing the banks. He questioned and queried many points made and seemed to be interested in being absolutely scrupulous and fair in his interpretation of the points made to him.
It was nice to meet Stephen at long last, we had spoken before and had many a MSN chat, but it is always good to put a face to a character. Tom was also very charming and extremely bright. EXC was.......well what can I say!? He is like The Stig, his identity and character is an ongoing enigma! A lovelier chap you couldn't hope to meet or know. Thanks for all your hard work and effort EXC.
We all had a very enjoyable hour long chat about the case, our thoughts for the outcome and of course, the various websites involved in the campaign against these charges.
Sadly I think we all agreed that the likely outcome will be a lengthy appeals process, so I feel a fresh assault on the FSA's waiver will be urgently required.
I walked down to the court with Stephen, Tom and Phil. They all decided that as the afternoon was likely to be entirely comprised of RBS's Laurence Rabinowitz putting his defence across, that they would head home and try and make up for their total lack of sleep!
I headed in to the court and took my seat at the back of the feed room. The room was 2/3 full, seemingly mainly with lawyers rather than journalists. Evidently, the media had their fun with Oystar earlier in the day! A dancing horse will always do better than 'dry legal argument'!
The feed room was quite small with two flat screens displaying a view of Mr Justice Andrew Smith and a second view of the court room.
Laurence Rabinowitz was working slowly through the RBS defence mainly trying to explain that a 'penalty' charge is effectively a part of the 'price' of a service or goods. There was a major discussion based around: http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/j...arlingtons.htm
Mr Justice Smith queried many points made by Mr Rabinowitz. At times he seemed utterly unconvinced of Mr Rabinowitz interpretations and interjected many times to request clarification. He also frequently offered an alternative analysis to a given scenario. He also disagreed when Mr Rabinowitz said that the OFT's interpretation of the implication of Bairstowe v Darlingtons was 'mangled' However the atmosphere was surprisingly light and at times even humorous. Both Justice Smith and Mr Rabinowitz have a sense of humour and used it often during their dialogue.
During the afternoon break, I got chatting with a lady sitting near me. After a few moments discussing who was who and the case, I asked where she was from and got a jolt when she said the BBA! She asked me where I was from, I said Legal Beagles and was rather amused to discover she knew all about us.
It was interesting and satisfying to have attended and seen the proceedings at close hand. I feel quietly confident that Justice Smith will be fair and meticulous in his hearing of the case. It is already widely believed that the case will now take several weeks as opposed to eight days. RBS are arguing first and longest, the others will follow on, presenting their own clients individual arguments, layering those on top of all defence arguments that precede them. In theory the banks toward the end of the queue will take less time than RBS who are scheduled to take 2 days.
The OFTs section of the case will be the next highlight.
I arrived at the bunker shortly after 12. It was a great set up, even if it did look like there had been a stampede in there. Lap tops, clothes and coffee cups everywhere!
EXC, Tom Brennan, Phil and Stephen arrived shortly after one. We ordered lunch and discussed the events of the morning.
The overall impression is that we have a GOOD JUDGE! He wasn't at all overwhelmed by the vast array of legal elite representing the banks. He questioned and queried many points made and seemed to be interested in being absolutely scrupulous and fair in his interpretation of the points made to him.
It was nice to meet Stephen at long last, we had spoken before and had many a MSN chat, but it is always good to put a face to a character. Tom was also very charming and extremely bright. EXC was.......well what can I say!? He is like The Stig, his identity and character is an ongoing enigma! A lovelier chap you couldn't hope to meet or know. Thanks for all your hard work and effort EXC.
We all had a very enjoyable hour long chat about the case, our thoughts for the outcome and of course, the various websites involved in the campaign against these charges.
Sadly I think we all agreed that the likely outcome will be a lengthy appeals process, so I feel a fresh assault on the FSA's waiver will be urgently required.
I walked down to the court with Stephen, Tom and Phil. They all decided that as the afternoon was likely to be entirely comprised of RBS's Laurence Rabinowitz putting his defence across, that they would head home and try and make up for their total lack of sleep!
I headed in to the court and took my seat at the back of the feed room. The room was 2/3 full, seemingly mainly with lawyers rather than journalists. Evidently, the media had their fun with Oystar earlier in the day! A dancing horse will always do better than 'dry legal argument'!
The feed room was quite small with two flat screens displaying a view of Mr Justice Andrew Smith and a second view of the court room.
Laurence Rabinowitz was working slowly through the RBS defence mainly trying to explain that a 'penalty' charge is effectively a part of the 'price' of a service or goods. There was a major discussion based around: http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/j...arlingtons.htm
Mr Justice Smith queried many points made by Mr Rabinowitz. At times he seemed utterly unconvinced of Mr Rabinowitz interpretations and interjected many times to request clarification. He also frequently offered an alternative analysis to a given scenario. He also disagreed when Mr Rabinowitz said that the OFT's interpretation of the implication of Bairstowe v Darlingtons was 'mangled' However the atmosphere was surprisingly light and at times even humorous. Both Justice Smith and Mr Rabinowitz have a sense of humour and used it often during their dialogue.
During the afternoon break, I got chatting with a lady sitting near me. After a few moments discussing who was who and the case, I asked where she was from and got a jolt when she said the BBA! She asked me where I was from, I said Legal Beagles and was rather amused to discover she knew all about us.
It was interesting and satisfying to have attended and seen the proceedings at close hand. I feel quietly confident that Justice Smith will be fair and meticulous in his hearing of the case. It is already widely believed that the case will now take several weeks as opposed to eight days. RBS are arguing first and longest, the others will follow on, presenting their own clients individual arguments, layering those on top of all defence arguments that precede them. In theory the banks toward the end of the queue will take less time than RBS who are scheduled to take 2 days.
The OFTs section of the case will be the next highlight.
)