For help, advice and discussion about stuff not related to aviation. Play nice: no religion, no politics and no axe grinding please.
#1715326
You have to hand it to the legal trade for mutual job creation, "Leave to appeal? Certainly!"

Both sets of lawyers get another bite at the cherry, and different judges get to hear the case. (Oh, we need more judges to cope with the increased workload? Well, guess we've got to dig deep.)

All of this expensive exercise, or as near all as makes no odds, funded by the taxpayer.

Bill H
#1715343
Sooty25 wrote:not sure it will be taxpayer funded, why should it be?


CPS prosecutor, whether employee or as often commissioned, and judge will both be paid out public funds through MoJ. Whether appellants will get Legal Aid I don't know.

If grounds for appeal raise important points of law or public policy, eg challenge to validity of use of anti-terrorism statute in this case, I'd expect both sides to use senior, therefore expensive, Counsel. If such issues are raised and settled one way or another, then Appeal may serve a useful long term purpose for society.
#1715396
What they did was clearly a criminal act, regardless of whether they think it was justified. To get to the point of deportation, I'd guess all legal appeals had been exhausted, so under UK law, they were to leave.

I hope costs get awarded to CPS once this fails.
#1715403
Could be an interesting appeal..... this earlier article gives the reasons for their appeal.

After a nine-week trial, the protesters were last month convicted of endangering the safety of an aerodrome, an offence under the 1990 Aviation and Maritime Security Act that carries a maximum sentence of life in prison.

The verdict – described by Amnesty International as a “crushing blow for human rights in the UK” – came after the judge told the jury to disregard all evidence put forward by the defendants to support the defence that they acted to stop human rights abuses.

On Monday, lawyers representing all 15 defendants lodged submissions amounting to around 100 pages at the court of appeal in London. They are arguing that the judge was biased in his summing up of the case, that he should have allowed the defendants to make the defence of necessity, and that he got the law wrong about what the offence means.


https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... eportation
#1715670
Sooty25 wrote:What they did was clearly a criminal act, regardless of whether they think it was justified. To get to the point of deportation, I'd guess all legal appeals had been exhausted, so under UK law, they were to leave.

I hope costs get awarded to CPS once this fails.

You might guess that, but you would be wrong.

Appeals were still ongoing for several of the deportees. In the weeks following the cancellation of the flight, at least two cases came to court which the Home Office lost. This looked embarrassing, given that the deportation flight was conducted on the basis that the deportees would 'probably lose'. The Home Office appealed both cases (that I know about) and lost both again. The 'deportees' who are no longer deportees have indefinite leave to remain in the UK.

It is the practice of 'deport first, establish legalities later' that the protesters were protesting about and what the judge told the jury was not relevant.
kanga, PaulB, Colonel Panic and 1 others liked this