Translate

Wednesday 2 April 2014

ABC in applications to ECHR


                                       
    

Supplementary table to the statement of facts II 

1.     On the month of June 2000 and the month of April 2004 Mary Josofar Valdivieso Fortuno Flores (further referred to here as MJVFF) took on the two leases of two commercial properties at 104 & 106-108 Cromer Street, London WC1H 8BZ. Both were art galleries and events spaces. Put shortly MJVFF was out of Business on at lease a dozen occasions from 2004-2008 because of defects in the building not in her control and covered by building insurance repairing scheme, held jointly by MJVFF and the landlord Community Housing Association LTD.   
How the convention was breached
1.    Article 1 Protection of property.


2.     On the month of October 2008 the landlord trespassed 104 & 106-108 Cromer Street premises due to an outstanding liability claim on the insurance, for which they backed by our joint insurers, hoped to avoid. Because they had failed to make claims so the insurers would not pay and neither party wanted to pay so they attacked us.
How the convention was breached
2.    Article 1 Protection of property.

3.     MJVFF took an injunction on both premises and on an order from the High Court the case proceeded to the County Court for a ten days trial held in July 2010.
             How the convention was breached
        3.  N/A

4.     The lead up to the trial was unfair because the Judge responded only to the landlords solicitors for disclosure, there was an inequality of arms, the particular of claims were rejected by the judge and then accepted wasting thousands of pounds and there was no speed in getting to court even though the High Court had ordered it to be speedy. The judge also allowed more expense for us by entertaining a section 25 notice when it was clear that the outcome could only be decided upon completion of the trial. All issues in detail of the unfair lead up to the trial are placed in the appendix sent to ECHR as the facts for permission to appeal.
How the convention was breached
       4.  Article 6 Right to a fair trial & Article 1 Protection of Property

5. The trial was unfairly heard and MJVFF was disallowed to put her case orally where as the landlord had 4 days with MJVFF in the witness box. This was a mismanagement of the trial time and allowed no more time for MJVFF to plead her case so after waiting for two years her case was never heard. In fact MJVFF was asked by the Judge to put her case in an email at that the end of the trial.
              How the convention was breached
       5.  Article 6 Right to a fair trial & Article 1 Protection of Property

6.  Both parties were asked instead of a further hearing at the end of the incomplete trial to put written ‘submissions on liability’ to the County Court. The allocated time for this was unfair with an advantage to the landlord.
            How the convention was breached
Article 6 Right to a fair trial & Article 1 Protection of Property

7. Judgment was given which was based only on the landlord’s case and this was glaringly obvious. MJVFF put in an application to the courts with evidence from her notes of the first judgment that the judge had firstly, not heard her case orally and secondly had not read her ‘submissions on liability’. Her notes proved her case so well that the judge admitted he had not read her case either. He decided to read the ‘submissions on liability’ 92 pages and 245 paragraphs, with 350 exhibits referred to, the next day and to do another judgment he following day. We are suggesting he did this to cover himself for his failure to conduct a fair trial.
            How the convention was breached
       7.  Article 6 Right to a fair trial & Article 1 Protection of Property

8. The second judgment was equally unfair using just one law to cover over a dozen issues and permission for appeal was refused. Again all the detailed appendixes of this have been sent to the ECHR.
                    How the convention was breached
       8.  Article 6 Right to a fair trial & Article 1 Protection of Property

9. MJVFF sought permission to appeal on liability before the costs hearing but the same judge told her that she would need to obtain the transcripts of the two judgments before she could get permission. The costs hearing should not have been allowed to go ahead whilst this process had not yet taken place as the costs hearing was dependent on liability being established. Meanwhile she applied for the transcripts to the appellant court. All details of this are also in the appendix’s sent to the ECHR. The cost hearing unlawfully went ahead.
            How the convention was breached
       9.  Article 6 Right to a fair trial & Article 1 Protection of Property

10. The transcripts took two years to be produced by the civil appeals office. Without them permission to appeal could not be processed. MJVFF constantly requested them.
            How the convention was breached
       10.  Article 6 Right to a fair trial & Article 1 Protection of Property

11. In the end the civil appeals office took an illegal step in process of asking for the solicitor’s unapproved notes of the other side. I had to challenge this by going through her notes and pointing out that they were inaccurate and also saying that this could have been done two years earlier with my notes which I sent in for approval to the judge but there was no reply. I had asked for her notes under the CPR before and they were not given over I was simply ignored by the courts. Permission to appeal was not given based on the solicitor’s notes! MJVFF then applied for an oral hearing.
              How the convention was breached
       11.  Article 6 Right to a fair trial & Article 1 Protection of Property

12. On May 10th 2012 the Judge ordered that the hearing of the renewed application for permission to appeal be brought back before him but with the assistance of a pro-bono lawyer. The clerk took a loud telephone call during the hearing whilst MJVFF was giving her legal plea for permission to appeal. Permission to appeal should not have been dependent on a lawyer being present as MJVFF’s arguments were very concise and clear.
            How the convention was breached
       12.  Article 6 Right to a fair trial & Article 1 Protection of Property

13. This delayed the case for a further 7 months and the lawyer reformulated the grounds of appeal.
How the convention was breached
       13.  Article 6 Right to a fair trial & Article 1 Protection of Property

14. MJVFF’s case was now not very much in her control and she suspected behind the scenes deals going on as might be for a tactical game to conclude the case but perhaps with not all points covered. In short she felt her case was being hacked to pieces. She has evidence it was and has presented it to the Supreme Court as seen in the appendix’s in detail given to the ECHR.
How the convention was breached
       14.  Article 6 Right to a fair trial & Article 1 Protection of Property



15. At the 5th Dec permission to appeal hearing she orally asked the judge that if, when she gets the advice from the pro-bono unit she does not agree with it or wants to add further grounds that may have been taken out by the lawyer volunteer, she can do so. The judge agreed. MJVFF did not know how the lawyer was playing it as she only met him once for half an hour. He did get permission to appeal on 7 0f 10 grounds.
How the convention was breached
       15.  Article 6 Right to a fair trial & Article 1 Protection of Property


16. When another lawyer from the pro-bono unit finally gave the advice it was late and MJVFF wholeheartedly disagreed with it.  The volunteer counsel and MJVFF parted ways and MJVFF proceeded to appeal having put all the issues back into the case and applying officially to add two more grounds in where there was irrefutable evidence that for example she asked for the structure to be repaired for which the county court judge had said she had not and for which if she had, was insured and liability would be established. The court refused the 2 new grounds without any reason given, effectively taking out bits of her case unjustifiably and underhandedly.
How the convention was breached
       16.  Article 6 Right to a fair trial & Article 1 Protection of Property

17.  The Appeal date was changed without notice to the day after it was allocated. It was also cut from two days to one day and up until lunchtime, when the three appellant Judges walked out mid MJVFF pleading her case and without any warning from the clerks. The appeal was dismissed and the trial was corrupt in that it stated in Judgment that MJVFF had asked for an implied repairing covenant when she had asked for no such thing she had asked for an implied covenant that the landlord should not breach the terms of the insurance 5(22) not withstanding she was in contract insured already and contract was simply breached by the landlord making her uninsured.
How the convention was breached
       17.  Article 6 Right to a fair trial & Article 1 Protection of Property


18. MJVFF sought to stay the judgement on the grounds that this was not her case that had been judged. This was officially refused. She then sought permission to appeal to the Supreme Court, which was rejected with no grounds for the rejection.
How the convention was breached
       18.  Article 6 Right to a fair trial & Article 1 Protection of Property


19. Judgement was given on May 24th 2013 where MJVFF stated that clause 5(22) (which she had based all of her argument on at the appeal using Barrett v Lounova as the needed ground for an implied obligation as the contract would make no sense without it) had been ignored in judgment. The judge said that it was in the Judgment, which it is not. The judgement was about a repairing obligation which is a case she never pleaded so they just made it up as they went along to suit the judgment and rid themselves of my  case.  I asked the Supreme Court to provide the transcripts to prove my point but they said they were not necessary at the reception desk. I went to the High Court to get them but they said I could only get them at the Supreme Court. So catch 22. Anyway the Supreme Court completely ignored me.
How the convention was breached
       19.  Article 6 Right to a fair trial & Article 1 Protection of Property

20. A cost order of about half a million with interest gaining by the day is pending and both premises have been stolen.
How the convention was breached
       20.  Article 6 Right to a fair trial & Article 1 Protection of Property

21. Article 1 & 6 of the European Court of Human Rights has been breached by the UK. MJVFF has evidence of corruption, be it somewhat political that is of no interest to her case or her personally. However the President judge of the Supreme Court in the UK and as was at the time the Master of the Rolls had his judicial assistant writing reports to the presiding judge to reject permission to appeal from the county court and also the original president of the Supreme Court had his judicial assistant writing reports too of the same nature. There is a conflict of interest as that is a family connection that should have no part in my case and that is not due diligence to have that take place. The Baroness Neuberger was the chairperson of the large social landlord who trespassed my premises and the leading judge is her brother in law Lord David Neuberger.
How the convention was breached
       21.  Article 6 Right to a fair trial & Article 1 Protection of Property



             















































































































































































































































































































































































































No comments:

Post a Comment