Jump to content

Big Boris, Our Prime Minister


shull

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, salmonbuddie said:
On 9/11/2019 at 9:39 PM, TPAFKATS said:
It was a flippant comment in regards to BOK suggesting England would decide.
The judgement has been made under scots law and the supreme court will now hear. I think it's 9 judges with 2 Scots law?

9 English law judges, 2 Scots law judges & 1 NI law judge I think, hence 10 v 2.

You'd have to question the competency of those 10 to comment on Scots law.

And just to be bloody minded...........how relevant is Scots law when it pertains to an English Parliament..........and just to be absurd (I can be good at that) if the Scottish legal system decided all schools should have Scots pies for lunch........how is that relevant to English schools in other words what the feck business is it of ours?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


11 hours ago, salmonbuddie said:

There will be no grounds for outrage and i say that as an independence-leaning Scot.  If people choose to use a decision that is made in the UK supreme court as evidence that Scotland's voice is never heard then I am afraid that will be a set-back for independence.  There is a strong enough positive case for independence and there is no need to resort to faux-outrage as a way of forwarding the cause.

dae you ware tartin nickers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/11/2019 at 9:35 PM, TPAFKATS said:

Judges have made a judgement under scots law. You might not agree but it's not political.
The amount of rage from brexiters, including politicians, because a legal judgement went against the government is both ludicrous and also quite worrying.
The judges decision isn't about brexit, it's about proroging parliament.

it's entirely political supporting the wee nyaf in charge and the judge who spoke looks like Salmonds Daddy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



And just to be bloody minded...........how relevant is Scots law when it pertains to an English Parliament..........and just to be absurd (I can be good at that) if the Scottish legal system decided all schools should have Scots pies for lunch........how is that relevant to English schools in other words what the feck business is it of ours?


It's not an English Parliament that it pertains to, though, is it?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest TPAFKATS
And just to be bloody minded...........how relevant is Scots law when it pertains to an English Parliament..........and just to be absurd (I can be good at that) if the Scottish legal system decided all schools should have Scots pies for lunch........how is that relevant to English schools in other words what the feck business is it of ours?
I'm not sure if you are being bloody minded or you are just being thick as shit.
English parliament fur f**ksake.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Slartibartfast said:


 

 


Yeah, well, thanks for explaining what everyone already knows. :hammer

The actual point of the question, though, was if (and I don't know if this is correct or not) the two appeals are heard under different legal systems then there is the possibility (however small) that it could end with conflicting results. What would the outcome then be? Maybe they aren't held under different legal systems and/or maybe they are being heard together (is it one decision, or two?) and it is a moot point.

If it turns out that both decisions are upheld (or both overturned) there will obviously be a conflict and a decision will have to be made one way or other. After that decision, there would be people that will claim that English law is being treated as more important than Scots law or Scots law is being treated as more important than English law.

Or is there a separate sort of "UK Law" that these are heard under?

We all know WHAT the Supreme Court does, very few of us will know the details of HOW it does it. I suppose we are all about to find out.

Where the feck's ZA when you need him?

 

Both Scots and English law are competent to hear these cases. Above both of the courts mentioned there is the Supreme Court in the UK to which this the judgement in Scotland, England and NI have been referred as e.g. The court in Scotland recognised the case was likely to end up there, said so in their judgement and in doing so expedited matters. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, salmonbuddie said:


 

9 hours ago, jaybee said:
And just to be bloody minded...........how relevant is Scots law when it pertains to an English Parliament..........and just to be absurd (I can be good at that) if the Scottish legal system decided all schools should have Scots pies for lunch........how is that relevant to English schools in other words what the feck business is it of ours?

 


It's not an English Parliament that it pertains to, though, is it?

 

No, but it is in London last time I looked........perhaps they moved it and didn't tell me .... ever so sorry. Actually yes it is, or i you would rather be pedantic it's a UK parliament sitting in London, but then that belittles the wee nyafs one in Edinburgh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TPAFKATS said:
9 hours ago, jaybee said:
it's entirely political supporting the wee nyaf in charge and the judge who spoke looks like Salmonds Daddy.
9 hours ago, jaybee said:
as are  the wee fat jock judges

Oh wait, it's humour...

Well those wee fat lawers/judges/magistrates were certainly a joke, but what is more 'humerous' is the fact that people seriously believe that there judgement is NOT Political, THAT is a joke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Slartibartfast said:
9 hours ago, jaybee said:
And just to be bloody minded...........how relevant is Scots law when it pertains to an English Parliament..........and just to be absurd (I can be good at that) if the Scottish legal system decided all schools should have Scots pies for lunch........how is that relevant to English schools in other words what the feck business is it of ours?

So it was just English MPs that the parliament was prorogued for?

You're not very good at this trolling lark, are you?

Whilst YOU are just not very good or perhaps just NOT?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone in here that has studied law or work in that field able to clear up a question I have?

There's a quote being flung around twitter "Scots Law has no equal in English Law, in the Act of Union 1707, Scottish Law is sovereign in Scotland and has no equal outside Scotland. In other words, Scotland has its own law and no English or British court can overrule Scots Law"

I don't know enough about it to call bullshit - but are there serious legal implications if the decisions do turn out to clash?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Doakes said:

Anyone in here that has studied law or work in that field able to clear up a question I have?

There's a quote being flung around twitter "Scots Law has no equal in English Law, in the Act of Union 1707, Scottish Law is sovereign in Scotland and has no equal outside Scotland. In other words, Scotland has its own law and no English or British court can overrule Scots Law"

I don't know enough about it to call bullshit - but are there serious legal implications if the decisions do turn out to clash?

On Tuesday two Scots will be sitting on the panel of judge's as the decision taken is for the whole of the UK. There will also be Welsh and N. Ireland on the panel also from what I heard on Newsnight. 

Edited by Isle Of Bute Saint
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, beyond our ken said:

What I am saying is that all of the UK supreme court judges will be highly aware and competent in their scrutiny of a judgement made under Scots law.  It happens in so many walks of life already and no-one is crying about other appeals that have gone from Edinburgh to London.

Those bringing the case say it is not about Brexit, it is about the abuse of power and what is really highlighted is the absence of a reliable user manual for the governance of the UK.

There will be no grounds for outrage and i say that as an independence-leaning Scot.  If people choose to use a decision that is made in the UK supreme court as evidence that Scotland's voice is never heard then I am afraid that will be a set-back for independence.  There is a strong enough positive case for independence and there is no need to resort to faux-outrage as a way of forwarding the cause.

 

Well indeed, these are the rules we have to play by.

Makes a pretty strong case for changing the game though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Doakes said:

Anyone in here that has studied law or work in that field able to clear up a question I have?

There's a quote being flung around twitter "Scots Law has no equal in English Law, in the Act of Union 1707, Scottish Law is sovereign in Scotland and has no equal outside Scotland. In other words, Scotland has its own law and no English or British court can overrule Scots Law"

I don't know enough about it to call bullshit - but are there serious legal implications if the decisions do turn out to clash?

It's only true up to the point where Scots law diverges from the rest of the UK.  Decisions in the UK supreme court  are mostly considered influential over what might eventually come before a scottish court in the same context.  In other words, the decision of the supreme court will influence the thinking of Scots judges if a further constitutional question comes forward.  The Scots judge might choose to act against the influence but is bound to consider the possibility of an appeal to the UK supreme court and the Scots judge already has their opinion so going against that influence would be pointless.  In some cases, I believe, the UK supreme court has authority over Scots judgements..

In Scotland, legislation handed down from Westminster is applied in it's original form-health and safety law and regulation is a good example of that-  however the structure in NI dictates that they have their own version of some, if not all, UK laws. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest TPAFKATS
She obviously felt that she had to clear the air on this one.
When challenged by temporary speaker Christopher Omulele (Luanda) on how she intends to have farting and flatulence aboard air crafts checked and if possible stopped, she said special training of aircraft crew should be undertaken.

Ffs, with that level of planning she'd fit in well with Boris and his plans for how we will sort brexit. Obviously with her being a black African our PM may cause (another) diplomatic incident.
Link to comment
Share on other sites



What’s her problem? She could always open the window [emoji100][emoji40][emoji2373]
It'll cost you...

[emoji846]

https://www.itv.com/news/anglia/2019-07-18/jet2-passenger-who-tried-to-open-aircraft-doors-on-a-flight-to-turkey-hit-with-85-000-fine/
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...