Where's the Justice…? (The Civil Justice System in Disrepute)
The Judicial Oath
“I…… do swear by Almighty God that I will well and truly serve our Sovereign Lady Queen Elizabeth the Second in the office of…, and I will do right to all manner of people after the laws and usages of this realm, without fear or favour, affection or ill will. So help me God.”
So there we have it. The Judicial oath – a solemn promise to do right, to follow the law and to do so fairly with impartiality.
This is the fulcrum upon which the whole credibility of the system of Civil Justice in England and Wales depends. The merest hint of justice denied is a stain on the good character and repute of the system itself. But there is something more than a mere ‘accidental’ or isolated injustice going on at our County Courts in repossession hearings against the scum. When it comes to keeping or losing your family home it has seemed for some time now that a great many of our County Court judges are violating a fundamental principle. THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD FAIRLY AND IMPARTIALLY IS BEING DENIED AND DEFENCES ARE BEING TOSSED CONTEMPTUOUSLY ASIDE.
I am becoming increasingly angry at the mounting anecdotal evidence of judicial arrogance towards Litigants In Person. It seems that a growing number of our County Court judges don’t like people who cannot afford representation and therefore “choose” (hardly the right word, but no matter…) to mount their own defence. And it also appears that our judges take particular displeasure with defendants who submit strongly founded defences.
How dare you? Do you not realise that you must not have the temerity to submit a strongly founded defence. You must be submissive, polite, deferential and silent both during and after the scum’s brief has lied, distorted and misrepresented and the judge has nodded sagely. Whatever you do don’t counter with anything based in law or in fact. This would constitute an affront to the smooth running of the “justice” system, and severely disrupt the 10 minutes per hearing target they have set themselves.
Let’s start by looking at the Civil Procedure Rules, which for those of you who don’t know are the rules and practice directions, the Courts and parties to a case MUST FOLLOW. They are, if you like, a kind written constitution for the civil justice system. The rules are divided into various parts such as the protocols that need to be observed when making a claim, when submitting evidence, when seeking orders for disclosure and specialist sections dealing with, amongst others, the rules on repossession.
Here’s a quick look at some of the procedures claimants (that’s the scum to me and you) in possession claims are supposed to adhere to and critically the Judge is supposed to be on the look out for.
A simple question. Has any judge in any hearing you have been at specifically asked for these? Not at any I’ve ever been at that’s for sure. Or do they ask the scum’s brief the devastating opening salvo “I trust everything is in order?” to which the scum’s brief replies “Yes, Sir…’ Note the repeated use of the word must. These are not optional add ons to be applied or discarded according to the whims, fancies and moods of judicial discretion.
How many have been repossessed on an order by the same judge on the same day who didn’t check to see whether these MUSTS were followed?
Subtle isn’t it? Favour, ill-will and an absence of fairness of the most lethal kind.
The invisible kind.
I AM NOW SO INCENSED BY OUR COURTS TOSSING ASIDE DEFENCES WITHOUT SO MUCH AS A CURSORY GLANCE THAT I INTEND TO RAISE A STINK ABOUT THIS AND FORCE THE ISSUE.
Please contribute your experiences. If you want this rot stopped and the prospects of at least getting a fair hearing improved, every story you tell will help. How did your Judge treat you?