Then Mr. Camperdown rose, and slowly walked across the New Square, Lincoln's Inn, under the low archway, by the entrance to the old court in which Lord Eldon used to sit, to the Old Square, in which the Turtle Dove had built his legal nest on a first floor, close to the old gateway.
Mr. Dove was a gentleman who spent a very great portion of his life in this somewhat gloomy abode of learning. It was not now term time, and most of his brethren were absent from London, recruiting their strength among the Alps, or drinking in vigours for fresh campaigns with the salt sea breezes of Kent and Sussex, or perhaps shooting deer in Scotland, or catching fish in Connemara. But Mr. Dove was a man of iron, who wanted no such recreation. To be absent from his law-books and the black, littered, ink-stained old table on which he was wont to write his opinions, was, to him, to be wretched. The only exercise necessary to him was that of putting on his wig and going into one of the courts that were close to his chambers;—but even that was almost distasteful to him. He preferred sitting in his old arm-chair, turning over his old books in search of old cases, and producing opinions which he would be prepared to back against all the world of Lincoln's Inn. He and Mr. Camperdown had known each other intimately for many years, and though the rank of the two men in their profession differed much, they were able to discuss questions of law without any appreciation of that difference among themselves. The one man knew much, and the other little; the one was not only learned, but possessed also of great gifts, while the other was simply an ordinary clear-headed man of business; but they had sympathies in common which made them friends; they were both honest and unwilling to sell their services to dishonest customers; and they equally entertained a deep-rooted contempt for that portion of mankind who thought that property could be managed and protected without the intervention of lawyers. The outside world to them was a world of pretty, laughing, ignorant children; and lawyers were the parents, guardians, pastors, and masters by whom the children should be protected from the evils incident to their childishness.
Wednesday 22 May 2013 08:01 UTC
This is the place for anything not connected with aviation. Strict rules of engagement apply. The moderators' decision is final.
PS: I love also Trollope's description of counsel and his instructing solicitor. It holds good of many such pairings today, and the passing description of the Inns of Court in August is still fairly applicable today.
Just heard on"t radio that ABU could now sue government--surely even this can"t be true in this unbeleivable patomime.
Like many others I thought that we were voting for freer trade within europe.--we seem to have ended up no longer deciding our own fate and making our own decisions.
Go back 50 years--or even less, and tell someone what"s happening now--my guess is their comment would be "don"t be so ***stupid-how could that happen".
Rog, I defer to no man in my loathing of the EU, its institutions and over-paid, arrogant, undemocratic apparatchiks, but even I cannot blame it for the farce being played out over this.
If it turns out that Theresa May was advised to delay until after 17th, but elected to go ahead anyway for political reasons (eg being seen to take decisive action, without delay), will she go, do we think?
Beware of Greeks bearing gilts
I doubt she will go, and all the shouting from the opposition, frothing with faux righteous indignation, isn't credible given their own track record in trying to deport this man, so no attempted pressure from them will make her.
On last night's news a letter was produced clearly stating that the time limit started on the day of the judgement. If that is true, then the ECHR seems to have changed its stance somewhat since it was written. There is no wonder confusion abounds, and is one more reason why it is so untrustworthy, and we should walk away from its jurisdiction. Doing so does not mean, as Gerard has already pointed out, that we have to abandon the convention; we simply use our own Supreme Court to pass sensible judgements on it, something the ECHR is increasingly proving itself unable to do.
ROG, surely even you must realise by now that the Strasbourg Court is not an EU institution? We have only been telling you that on every thread here since 1832.
Qatada can make all the threats of legal action that he likes. I still wager that he will be on a flight to Jordan in due course. As for suing, anyone can sue the government for all sorts of things, and many loonies, and crackpots, and gits, and people with good cases, and people with bad cases do so, but suing and winning are two different things.
Gerard, whose money would he use if he goes ahead to sue the Govt?
Would it be one of these no win, no fee efforts or would AQ's generous benefactors (the British taxpayers) foot the bill?
Guaranteed 100% iFree
Quite possibly sent from my Nexus 7 which cost 400 quid less than your iPad.
Capitalisation is the difference between helping your Uncle Jack off a horse and helping your uncle jack off a horse
He might use his own or his supporters' funds. He used to have a lot of cash under his bed, or he did when I encountered him a few years back. The UN froze his assets. I do not know if they are still frozen. A no win no fee deal is quite rare in a public law case, as few claims in that field are much better than fifty fifty. Some of the activist lawyers are sufficiently misguided to work for this idiot pro bono. He might get legal aid. I don't know if he is eligible. If he does, no one will get rich on the proceeds, as legal aid rates are pretty slender, but, yes, we might end up footing the bill. Is that rubbish? Yes, it is, but we have a system (which some of our blokes in sandy places defend with their lives for very rubbish pay), and we have to put up with a certain amount of pish taking, but will get rid of the git in the end. 100 years from now, Islamism will be something in the history books, but the UK and the common law will still be in business. Hang tough, I reckon. It's not a short game, but we are older, bigger, better, wiser and stronger than they are.
Given that its highly likely that his counsel will have worked out her tactics in advance of the previous decision, any chance of a contempt proceeding against her for unnecessarily delaying things? Might act to speed up a few others.
Cheering up a bit with grumpy spells later
Huh? How on Earth is the Home Secretary or any of the lawyers or anyone else here in contempt of any court?
Some of you guys watch too much US TV, or credit too much stuff in the meeja. As T always says, please take a few minutes to familiarise yourself with our courts, based on real life ones, not telly or newspaper versions. I have been teaching 15 year olds about our system, and some of the grown ups here could do with taking the "How Brit stuff works 101" course as well.
Last edited by Gerard Clarke on Fri Apr 20, 2012 11:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
It is the intention of Qatada to make people here distrust and resent our own system of doing things. He's a terrorist, and terrorism is not just about bombs and bullets. He wants to create instability, and maybe encourage repressive responses. The worse things get, the better, in the terrorist mind set.
But the fact that AQ is still here, still taking the pish out of us, is clear evidence that we are right to distrust and resent our own system!
Don't follow leaders
.. and by the way, regardless of the skill and bravery of our finest, I'm not convinced that actions in sandy places contribute anything to the defence of the realm..
Don't follow leaders
Who is online
Login / Register