tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post6360874232212721530..comments2024-03-28T09:08:50.733+00:00Comments on Law and Lawyers: A world apart from ordinary justice: almost a parallel universeObiterJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-22873109672375891702010-10-20T14:29:31.124+01:002010-10-20T14:29:31.124+01:00To follow your comments in your last paragraph: it...To follow your comments in your last paragraph: it has also been proposed that benefit claimants thought to have made false claims in some way be given an on-the-spot fine of £50, which leads to the following questions:<br /><br />a) how is this penalty going to be enforced and collected and by whom, assuming that fault can be proved, "on-the-spot"?<br /><br />b) what redress do claimants so accused and fined have against their accusers, given that legal aid would be severely restricted for a reactive response (that is, to such a fine) and denied for a proactive (that is, suing for, say, Malicious Prosecution)?<br /><br />c) how is this measure going to be enacted - as a part of an Act of Parliament or (more likely) an Order through Statutory Instrument? <br /><br />I must declare an interest as a claimant of Incapacity Benefit who has difficulties because of the 'incapacity" in representing himself and in getting adequate representation (you may like to look at The Resistible Rise Of The "Advocate" - or non-legally qualified adviser - that is being increasingly promoted, especially for those of us in the Lower Depths).Westenglandnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-231876528469622252010-10-20T11:42:27.142+01:002010-10-20T11:42:27.142+01:00I have spent many years hearing the argument that ...I have spent many years hearing the argument that a lawyer’s job is to use the process in the best interest of the client, even when such use is clearly outrageous, and it is for society to rely on the system to bring a just end conclusion. Even expound it myself at times.<br /><br />A theme so often visited here that, to save time, we now refer to it as "argument 27" and move on. No one can remember where 27 came from.<br /><br />On the latter point I agree with the sentiment (although I could find several arguments to the contrary that to follow in order to demonstrate abuse of processes). The problem is efficiency of the process, huge savings achievable in many areas of litigation. Could even afford to buy some planes to go on those aircraft carriers.Rolo Tamasihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12780549356275824765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-33310723360514560112010-10-20T10:55:11.729+01:002010-10-20T10:55:11.729+01:00Rolo - perhaps surprisngly, most lawyers have not ...Rolo - perhaps surprisngly, most lawyers have not lost sight of what "justice" is meant to be all about.<br /><br />What I find "surreal" is the idea that, in this day and age, there can even be a claim that alleged offences arising in connection with Parliamentary duties) cannot be tried outside of Parliament. I cannot imagine that the writers of the Bill of Rights 1689 intended such an outcome. Their intent was surely to protect the right of a member to act fearlessly in debate.ObiterJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04544226917595022902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-79859915008339952712010-10-20T10:42:46.917+01:002010-10-20T10:42:46.917+01:00Yes it does indeed - especially as all of them are...Yes it does indeed - especially as all of them are benefitting from Legal Aid. You couldn't make it up - but then we now have a group of elected hereditary peers - a difficult concept for many foreigners I suspect.Jim Brownhttp://www.probationmatters.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6110794854146484721.post-16094907045832911002010-10-20T10:36:34.988+01:002010-10-20T10:36:34.988+01:00A lawyer expounding the idea that lawyers should o...A lawyer expounding the idea that lawyers should only use available processes of law to do what is morally right? How surreal is that?<br /><br /><br />Mind you I don’t know why they are doing it, Parliament has a wish to demonstrate distance from the behaviour being tried. Biased against I think.Rolo Tamasihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12780549356275824765noreply@blogger.com