July 7th Hearing

[EXC]

Re: July 7th Hearing

I doubt whether it's been schuduled in the court diary yet. The handing down of the last judgment was announced on a Monday for the following Thursday - just 3 days notice.

[TANZARELLI]

Re: July 7th Hearing

Its certainly going to be a nail biter when we know the date.

:beagle:Sniff it out boy go on!! lol

[Sapphire]

Re: July 7th Hearing

Hmmmmm I might even brave the tube and make an appearance. Thats as long as we can have lunch/dinner at Claridge's afterwards.

[ROBSTER]

Re: July 7th Hearing

here we go !!!

COURT 73
Before MR JUSTICE ANDREW SMITH
Not before 16:30
For Judgment
2007-1186 Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National PLC

[EXC]

Re: July 7th Hearing

Just spotted it myself! Good find.

[Sapphire]

Re: July 7th Hearing

And that date is .................................................. .......

[EXC]

Re: July 7th Hearing

Tomorrrow at 4.30


http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/c...commercial.htm

[Curlyben]

Re: July 7th Hearing

Here you go : Court Hearings - Commercial and Admiralty Court


That being said we have seen this before back in April.

[ROBSTER]

Re: July 7th Hearing

Based on his "previous form" its likely to be a notification for Friday or Monday..Either way its likely to be buried in all the other goings on at the moment with Banks

..Unless we can push it back to "the top of the news" where it belongs!!

[EXC]

Re: July 7th Hearing

It's being handed down tomorrow and the judgment will be available on the Court Service website shortly after 4.30.

Justice Smith was down for an 'application in private' yesterday which may have been connected.

[Budgie]

Re: July 7th Hearing

Well, I am up for it Exc, how about you ?

I have just spoken to Joe.

He's saving me a copy of full judgment and also the two best seats in public area of the Court LOL

Apparantly hearing is scheduled to last for 30 mins max

Budgie

[EXC]

Re: July 7th Hearing

Yes I can't help thinking that the reason for the 4.30 time is because the stock market finishes trading at the same time.

[Shazzaw]

Re: July 7th Hearing

HOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!!!! !!!!!!

Another step closer hopefully though I guess we're still many months away.

As it's been so long since the hearing on Historicals could someone just confirm that tomorrow we are hoping for.....

1. Historical terms are assessable for fairness under UTCCR (is it imperative that this is the case in order for the OFT to investigate and hopefully ensure all claims for last 6 years are refunded?)

2. Historical terms are deemed to be penalties. (not imperative that they are but would be a bonus - is this correct?)

Thx and here's hoping that in 25 hours time we'll all a bit closer to getting our monies back.

s

[EXC]

Re: July 7th Hearing

HOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!!!! !!!!!!

Another step closer hopefully though I guess we're still many months away.

As it's been so long since the hearing on Historicals could someone just confirm that tomorrow we are hoping for.....

1. Historical terms are assessable for fairness under UTCCR (is it imperative that this is the case in order for the OFT to investigate and hopefully ensure all claims for last 6 years are refunded?)

2. Historical terms are deemed to be penalties. (not imperative that they are but would be a bonus - is this correct?)

Thx and here's hoping that in 25 hours time we'll all a bit closer to getting our monies back.

s

Not 'deemed' as penalties, but are 'capable' of being penalties. If they are judged as 'capable' there will need to be a test case to determine if they are actually penalties - Justice Smith alluded to this at the 7 July hearing.

[Budgie]

Re: July 7th Hearing

1. Historical terms are assessable for fairness under UTCCR (is it imperative that this is the case in order for the OFT to investigate and hopefully ensure all claims for last 6 years are refunded?)

2. Historical terms are deemed to be penalties. (not imperative that they are but would be a bonus - is this correct?)

1) Is pretty much a certainty as this was basically already agreed between the Banks and the OFT at earlier hearings. This hearing will be the official handing down of that part of the judgement. It is certain to be appealed by the Banks at the next hearing.

2) I suspect that we will have a variety of different results for different Banks. IE Some historic terms of certain Banks will be declared as capable of being penal and others will not. It's the mix and the reasoning behind the decisions that will be the interesting part. Any decisions that go against the Banks are certain to be appealled and I am hopeful that the OFT will appeal any decisions made against their own arguments. But again they will have to await the next hearing before seeking permission to appeal.

Budgie