Total Visits

Thursday, 4 July 2019

BREXIT CASE UPDATE

 

BREXIT CASE UPDATE


Since issuing the English Democrats’ case (claiming a Declaration that the UK left the EU on the expiry of our Notice on the 29th March 2019), the Administrative Court has not shown itself to be either as speedy or efficient at dealing with the case. 

This is despite my having made an initial Application to have the case expedited. This resulted in the Government Legal Department undertaking to provide their Grounds of Resistance by just before Easter on the 17th April  (usually they get a full 21 days).  Mr Justice Supperstone made an Order which was emailed to me confirming that in these circumstances he was not going to order the Government Legal Department to serve their Grounds of Resistance any sooner. 

Matters then did not progress as speedily as we would all have hoped.  So I then made a further Application for the case to be expedited, but received no indication as to when any hearing was going to occur.  So after waiting for almost another two months I went off on holiday for two weeks starting on the evening of Friday, 14th June. 

Until Tuesday, 25th June we had heard nothing further from the Court.  Although I am sole practitioner and most sole practitioners going on holiday simply close their office, I do have my assistant come in to check the post regularly and, of course, to answer any telephone calls, etc. 

I was therefore dismayed to hear that a decision had been made, the image of which I am showing on this blog, not only refusing to give Permission, which would be strange enough, given Sir Richard Aitkin’s, the retired Court of Appeal Judge’s public comment that this case is “strongly arguable”, which is well above the merely “arguable” threshold that is supposed to guarantee permission to Judicially Review.  But this Order went much further than that and certified on the flimsiest of grounds that our case was “Totally Without Merit”. This is a shorthand for a new procedure introduced in order to make things as difficult as possible for immigration cases, where the Administrative Court has been inundated with legally unmeritorious applications by litigants in person. 

If a case is certified as being Totally Without Merit, then the consequence is that an application to Appeal to the Court of Appeal has to be made within 7 days of deemed service. 

As you can see from the Court’s covering letter, the letter was purportedly sent out on Wednesday, 19th June and therefore deemed served on Friday, 21st.  In fact it had not arrived on Friday, 21st as my post was fully opened on that day. 

It is possible that it arrived on the 22nd or on Monday, 24th, as it was opened when my assistant next went into the office on Tuesday, 25th. 

To catch me out it needed me to go away for two weeks or more.  This holiday was the first time that I have done so for over 20 years!

The Order was then faxed that morning to our barrister, Francis Hoar, and work commenced to get this Application issued on or before the last date for issuing it, which was Friday, 28th. 

Francis did a superb job and got the Application ready for us to be able to issue it, despite my still being away on holiday. 

If my personal practice had not been as thorough and as conscientious as it is, I think it is likely that I would have returned from holiday to find that we had already missed the deadline. 

Whenever I think about this situation I find it hard to believe that this “coincidence” is purely accidental.  This was the one opportunity in the whole of the last two months in which we could lose this case provided the paperwork was sent when it was, as explained above. 

Furthermore it is odd that the less important Order of Mr Justice Supperstone’s was emailed but this much more important Order was only posted. Nor were we given any advance warning.  I do not think I will ever be able to prove the attempted set up that seems to have happened here, but fortunately we have managed to keep the case on track by getting the Application in on time.

 If my suspicions are right it is a very sad reflection on the state of “justice” in this country which has now become so politicised that we seem to have lost the “Rule of Law” which was the cornerstone of England’s hard won and hard fought ancient Constitution.

A further matter emerged when there was the easily made confusion between two Mr Justice Spencers.  The signature on the Order looks like Mr Justice Martin Spencer, but it turns out on very close inspection of the documentation to be that of Mr Justice Robin Spencer aka Sir Robin Spencer.  

Inspection of the Facebook profile and Twitter account of Mr Justice Martin Spencer revealed that he was an outspoken Remainer. As it was put in a legal analysis:-
 

18. On the said Twitter site appear the following comments by Mr Spencer QC (as he then was) (all dated 24.6.2016, the day the referendum result was announced), none of which have since been removed, all of which were publicly available on 27.6.2019 and all of which continued to be published by Martin Spencer J up to the later date.  In chronological order:

(1)       ‘If Europe disintegrates, with the UK as the catalyst, we will have betrayed our children and grandchildren.’
(2)       This is not something we can undo in 3 or 4 years’ time as in a general election, it will affect generations.’
(3)       We have taken leave of our senses, as a country.  This was a time to stand together, untied with Europe in our beliefs and values.’

19.       The implied meaning of the above tweets includes the statements that (in respect of each numbered tweet using the same sub-paragraphs) those voting and those political parties advocating Leave in the referendum:

(1)       Are responsible:
(a)       for betraying their children and grandchildren;
(b)       for increasing the likelihood of the ‘disintegration’ of Europe;
(2)       Have damaged the UK for generations (this is imputed from the fact that the second comment immediately followed the first); and
(3)       Have, in particular, ‘taken leave of [their] senses’ and have betrayed the values that all should share.

21.       On 6.7.2016, on the said FB site, the user (it is assumed Mr Spencer QC, as he then was) made the following comment, which remained publicly available to view and thereby published on 27.6.2019:
‘Apparently, since the referendum vote, support for staying in the EU has risen in Denmark from 59.8 % to 69 %.  We appear to be a laughing stock in the rest of Europe.  This is Der Spiegel’s verdict: ‘the result has "created new rifts: between old and young, London and the provinces, the English and the Scottish. In the end, further referenda may follow, with the result that the once-powerful UK could be transformed into a loose alliance of marginalised mini-states." Quite.’

22.       The implied meaning of the above comment was that those voting Leave or advocating such a vote have:
(1)       Made the UK the laughing stock of Europe;
(2)       Been responsible for creating the rifts set out;
(3)       Increased the likelihood of the break-up of the UK into a loose alliance of marginalised mini-states, including England as an independent country;
And that:
(4)       The emergence of England as an independent country would be an extremely negative outcome, were it ever to occur.

23.       In respect of the implied meaning alleged at para 17 (3) above, the author reaches the conclusion that the break-up of the UK would be caused by rifts between (inter alia) England and Scotland; and went on to allege the emergence of ‘mini-states’.  Although England has a population of around 55 million, the most logical meaning of this other to an ‘idiot in a hurry’, informed by the well-known fact that England voted Leave and Scotland did not, was that England would be one of those states.

24.       The FB user, who appears to have been Mr Spencer QC (as he then was) also advertised the fact that he had signed an online Petition that said as follows:

‘We the undersigned call upon HM Government to implement a rule that if the remain or leave vote is less than 60% based a turnout less than 75% there should be another referendum.’

25.       The implied meaning of the above statement, which (if the site is his) Mr Spencer QC endorsed and which, in his judicial office, he continues to endorse through its publication, is that the Referendum result, in which under 60 % of the population on a turnout under 75 % voted to Leave, was illegitimate and that the UK should therefore remain in the EU in spite of the Referendum result.


Although these comments cannot have any bearing on this case, they do however have a strong bearing on what is happening to our legal system in which we have a Blairite Judicial Appointments Commission which will only appoint Judges who can “demonstrate a life time’s commitment to Equality and Diversity” and are therefore ideologically only of the multiculturalist Left and therefore almost all Remainers. 

This system of appointment clearly needs to be changed to ensure that people are only appointed as Judges as they are the best lawyers and their politics is ignored.  If the British Political Establishment are displaced then we can expect the terms of reference to the Judicial Appointments Commission to be changed after each General Election and appointments to be made only of those who are supporters of whichever party is then in power!



64 comments:

  1. Hmmm.... Robin, with respect, I would like to suggest that you focus on the primary “Brexit issue” which is the main reason that you have enjoyed a recent increase in funding, rather than peripheral legal cases that have recently been the subject of your emails.

    In addition, if you had the wrong QC name, why continue to “push” the now irrelevant stories surrounding that wrongly named QC? Is there anything relevant regarding the correct QC, or is he squeaky clean?

    Finally, please publish the reasons that the QC has given for refusing judicial review.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I have had my eyes opened over the total political bias in this country which is so corrupt they will resort to anything to stop Brexit happening. I have no idea how we stop this happening but fight we must. Thank you Robyn for fighting for our democracy however I have very little faith that we can overturn this terrible dictatorship who care little for anyone but themselves. May justice prevail or we are a lost cause and English no more.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hello Robin, I find this outrageous to say the least, it appears to me and lots of other people, you are being pushed aside and the Law as it stands is an Ass on this occasion. I thought that constitutional law was the ultimate and that unless there is another act of Parliament, no one could extend or change it. Whatever happens now, will cause tremendous distress for years to come to future generations. This is serious and sad. Question to your good self, is this now totally over have we completely lost?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Abzolutely correct, Robin and In totally agree!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thank you Robin for taking the time to give a detailed update. Very much appreciated. Good luck with your onerous endeavours, we are behind you all the way.

    ReplyDelete
  6. We as people of this country know we have been lied to by the goverment and that we will not give in,We now need to take to the streets with our banners telling people that we have left the EU on the 29th march 2019,and that the goverment should be shut down,while this court case is looked at,we the people want answers. And any politicians who has provoked the cause of justice should be dissmissed from parliment.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Absolutely agreed, Robin!..
    How about sending this to Boris Johnson's parliamentary office to see if he agrees!..

    ReplyDelete
  8. I find it outrageous that any judge can put forward their personal opinion as if it was the WILL and desire of the electorate and who are be ignored if they do not comply with the thoughts and opinion of said judge. This is NOT justice it is bigotry and bias at the highest level. To thwart the will of the people is despicable. That judge should never be anywhere near a courtroom or allowed to pass his or her judgement, which is clearly against the democratic decision in a free and legal election.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The swamp in this country needs clearing out can these leavers get anymore biased. Sky BBC are doing their best to spout their venom I believe there is such a stitch up in this country the whole thing stinks. Are we ever going to rid ourselves of being in this undemocratic state of the EU

    ReplyDelete
  10. Where are the images referred to?

    ReplyDelete
  11. I think it’s totally disgusting that even Judges will never accept the majority voted �� to leave. I mean even Theresa May did her best to keep us tied to the EU,let’s hope Boris gets us out on a NO DEAL.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Problem is these judges have their noses that far up each others arses that they think they are Gods and that the electorate are just uneducated peasants.

      Delete
  12. Shockingly apparent that the judiciary in this ruling has an agenda that is hostile to the democratic will of the British electorate.
    Clearly an investigation is warranted

    ReplyDelete
  13. Just shows how completely corrupt the elite in this country has now become.

    ReplyDelete
  14. The Media BLACKOUT continues as our corrupt Parliament hides the TRUTH from the People. This is TREASON, as they try to prevent our DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS, and IMPOSE EU TYRANNY on OUR COUNTRY. PLEASE SHARE this FAR and WIDE.

    ReplyDelete
  15. So where does all this leave the Brexit case? I understand it has gone to appeal, will a different judge view the papers and make a decision and when can we expect a response? As we hear the shenanigans which are still going on in Parliament in an attempt to block no deal etc it strikes me the success of this case is the only way we shall leave the eu.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I fully agree with your comprhensive analysis, thank you for you diligence

    ReplyDelete
  17. Either we adhere to justice and the rules therein of it or we don't . that includes these EU loving Judges who weigh the scales of justice off balance. it is time we the British public demand that our democracy is restored or else we may look at a different system that is not only fair minded but has not got the tainted hands of unelected EU. on it

    ReplyDelete
  18. The EU is in my view Satanic in its illuminati views and deeds .it is time the light og God unseated the devil from his EU throne

    ReplyDelete
  19. What a sad state of affairs our country has come to, judiciary subverting the law of the land down to the police ignoring drugs I am now ashamed to be British.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Keep up the good work Robin.

    ReplyDelete
  21. So if I get this right; because you went on holiday a 2 week window was started whilst you was away which in effect timed out so the Brexit Case is over?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No the case is not over as Robin discovered just in time for his barrister to submit the appeal. But he explains how he was tricked into a position where he could have been denied the appeal because of the timescale x

      Delete
    2. no its not over. The apeal was submitted on time. Its still ongoing.

      Delete
  22. Thank you Mr Tilbrook for keeping us informed of the progress of this case which it would appear carries all signs of prejudice at every turn. Not only do we h ave a virtual 75% Remain Government but also, it would appear a 'biased' BBC and now Judicial system. Perhaps, in order to honour the 2016 Referendum anyone, especially at such senior influential levels, should be required to swear an oath of impartiality and/or special committees of equal numbers of political representatives should be required to deliberate such issues..? Perhaps a petition could be raised by interested parties, to lobby Government to discuss the matter and to help stop such unfairness occurring?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Robin have you considered convening a Common Law Court (www.commonlawcourt.com) and simplying annuling the 1972 European Communities Act via annulment by jury? The same could be down with Lisbon and Maastrict etc treaties.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I agree nothing in it looks accidental. You have our support.

    ReplyDelete
  25. So, hang on I'm really confused now.

    The signature on the Order dated 19th June was that of Justice Sir Robin Spencer. Not the Honourable Justice Martin Spencer as previously stated by Mr Moore on his video update.

    So, what if any involvement has Justice Martin Spencer had in the proceedings, and if none at all, why does it matter if he's a virulent Remainer.

    I don't want to appear overly critical here because I consider this case important, and I really want to do everything I can to support you in pursuing it.

    But...and its a big BUT, as a matter of principle I will not promote any argument for leaving the EU which is not factually correct. Everything I post on SM, and say to people when canvassing has been carefully checked and verified by me to be (as far as I can reasonably determine) True, and I get really annoyed with other Leave supporters who diminish our cause by posting or repeating unsubstantiated rubbish on SM. It merely feeds the Trolls and discredits the valid arguments.

    I want to post something about this case.
    I want to support your argument.
    But I need accurate facts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with your comment and would like to look at your postings on SM. What is SM ?

      Delete
    2. Didz, I would like to read your postings on SM but don't know what SM is. Please advise. Thanks

      Delete
  26. We know there is something wrong with the Judicial system because the Indigenous people are the ones who are in the wrong ALL THE TIME.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Interesting reading ....

    David and Goliath comes to mind here. The odds seem stacked against us remainders.

    Too many coincidences here.
    Good luck Mr Tilbrook, I do hope you’ll succeed.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Robin
    I heard the case failed can I suggest if you appeal you take the line that the vote to leave was a vote to restore the rule of English common and constitutional law.

    The 1559 Act of supremacy, the 1689 Bill of Rights which incorporates the Declaration of Rights made by the Estates of England the 1701 Act of Settlement and the decision of the estates of England in May 1366 which ruled England did not belong to King John it was not his to give away to the Pope as he only held England in trust for those who follow on Stubbs II P435.
    The case being constitutional must be heard in the Crown court by three Judges or a jury. If the Judges reject the case they can be arrested where they sit for treason contrary to the constitutional arrangements of England. All of the above make foreign interference in the governance of England acts of treason.

    ReplyDelete
  29. The USA has the system where all political appointees are removed from office and new ones appointed by the incoming administration. Perhaps it would be good if it happen in the UK.

    ReplyDelete
  30. The judiciary and constabulary in the UK is NOT independent of politics as it should be and should have NO position on Brexit. And policing should be even handed and not favouring the Islamic community as we have seen when Christian preachers ars roughly arrested while muslims are allowed to pray and preach in the streets. Anyone would think that the police and judiciary had become the servants of Islam in the name of Political Correctness

    ReplyDelete
  31. If a judge is proven to be biased can he be barred from practice? This includes all other references before he gets elected to the role I am aware of the rules and this appears to a prejudiced decision. Time to sack the judge.

    ReplyDelete
  32. The Europäische Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft
    - Berlin 1942
    (The European Economic Community - Berlin 1942) http://www.bilderberg.org/EWG.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  33. Does this mean our case will not be heard even though an Appeal has been lodged? How can we fight these traitors in the judiciary?

    ReplyDelete
  34. Does anyone dealing with this case understand the meaning of democracy?

    ReplyDelete
  35. Thanks for keeping us all informed the best you can and please don't give up the fight.
    We are all wishing you the best of luck. God bless you and your team.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Thanks for the update Robin!

    #WWG1WGA

    ReplyDelete
  37. Thank God for people like you. You are a true Gentleman and I am with you on this.

    Good luck Sir.

    ReplyDelete
  38. I'm saddened by this, I thought we had the best and fairest legal system in the world. It seems that corruption is so deep that we need a massive purge on all levels in our once great country. Judges must be impartial and be appointed that role on level of ability otherwise it it just nepotism. God help us.

    ReplyDelete
  39. A sad indictment of the Judiciary and rule of law in a once great country that others set their standards by.

    ReplyDelete
  40. There is a contradictory spelling mistake. Did no one notice?
    Untied with Europe, which signifies "LEAVING" as oppose to United, which signifies REMAIN. Proof-read, somebody!

    ReplyDelete
  41. This used to be the judicial system of which all could be proud.....and now?????

    ReplyDelete
  42. Good job that petition was started by OH ?

    ReplyDelete
  43. Our "judiciary" are a bunch of recalcitrant rogues that are perverting 100's of years of our justice and constitution Sir William Blackstone would of had their "guts for garters" as there is no way the underhanded tactics in this case would have survived. Thank heaven Robin Tilbrook has the measure of these errants and their scurrilous ways.We are blessed to have such an honourable man representing the 17.4 million that have yet to see JUSTICE.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Confirms my suspicions aswell as Nigel Farage that our Judiciary at the top is very much biased to the EU. The sooner we get out of the EU and make English Justice the Best in the World again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A strange aspect to this,is the total silence of Nigel Farage and the Brexit Party on the subject

      Delete
  45. Thank you for all your hard work. We will get there!

    ReplyDelete
  46. The Polish government are trying to rid their legal system of politicised judges, and the EU is up in arms about it.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Well done Robin for being on the ball, we appreciate all that you and your co workers are doing for us, keep up the great work that you are all doing. The above shows us exactly how corrupt them lot that think they are above us all are. Please get us out of this corrupt system as soon as possible. Many thanks from us all. Caroline McGachan.

    ReplyDelete
  48. If the appeal fails will the media blackout stop information filtering through to the public. Also, Bill Of Rights 1688; Supremecy, Para 1 may help us out , but how can we claim redress?

    ReplyDelete
  49. This appears to show, not only do we have a broken system of democracy in the UK, but we also have a legal system with some who will do anything to keep us in the EU despite the will of the majority. Especially when we saw the Gina Miller case was expedited quickly.

    ReplyDelete
  50. This case is like the parrot in the sketch of Monty Python....dead, or more likely non existing

    ReplyDelete
  51. So you are now in the process of Appeal? Brett Keane, NZ

    ReplyDelete
  52. So you are now in the process of Appeal? Brett Keane, NZ

    ReplyDelete
  53. How can a judge fulfil his/her duties without 'fear or favour' to discharge their duty to the court, if their personal views are so extreme? Strikes me that this person should be disbarred, as any judgement made relating to the subject matter could legitimately be challenged, by virtue of the judges stated position.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Robin, I agree this is a stitch up and pure procedural chicanery on the part of the High Court. The law is NOT consistently applied and that is the problem, however I am pleased your counsel managed to get the Application into the Court of Appeal on time.

    If the Appeal Court refuses, I am sure this case will end up in the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. Do they really want this? If they do they are literally mad.

    Anyway on a different matter I've been reading an interpretation of the Book of Daniel that warns us of a twist on our road to freedom.

    The British Isles are referred to as Ephraim and Germany as Assyria. Apparently we are descendants of the lost ten tribes of Israel and we were promised riches and prosperity by God if we went out to colonise and Police the world. We were warned that if we were turned our back on God that he would punish us.

    It is was prophesied that God would use Germany to punish Britain if we turned away from God, by firstly removing our riches and secondly putting into "captivity". The scriptures tell us that there will be a war in which we are defeated and put under German control until Christ returns. This is why the EU is pressing ahead with the EU Army while our military is tiny now.

    https://www.thetrumpet.com/13988-bible-prophecy-foretold-a-brexit

    francis

    ReplyDelete
  55. keep up the good work,let democracy prevail!

    ReplyDelete
  56. The Government knew Robin was going on holiday (probably being watched by MI5) The judges factless refusal was timely done and sent to Robin at a deliberate time so that he would miss the deadline for the appeal. Treasonous

    ReplyDelete
  57. Yes but he didn't miss the dead line it was in on time

    ReplyDelete
  58. It may not be everyone’s cup of tea but, I would suggest that. A General Election is brought about and, due to criminal activity continues to kick the can down the road. There should in such a General Election, be a massive vote for the Brexit Party. Giving a Majority in the House of Commons.

    ReplyDelete