neighbour claimed via small claims against me for alleged damages to there property 150 year old terrace during a loft conversion,damages so severe as as to require two full ceilings to be pulled down and replaced, they have no credible evidence only there word,state they reported it to me and i ignored them,go on to verbally report to have taken legal advice and notified the building inspector for which there is no evidence if fact the contrary i have a written report to say no complaint had been made,ther is no visible evidence as they insist the work has been repaired, and for which they have no signed invoices dodgy estimates, furthermore they report they were subjected to extensive noise and vibration as a result of this work &refurbishment to align the property to todays standards, plumbing,wiring installation of a kitchen.. the judge decided in there favour alleging a tort of nuisance on the credibility of the claiments and the balance of probabilities How? does he know them?
2006-11-29 09:03:38 · 5 answers · asked by KAy 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I doubt that he does know them - unless of course they are all part of the dodgy 'Masonic Lodges' brigade - which is quite common in the smaller courts. I would appeal DEFINITELY xx
2006-11-29 09:07:56 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If the judge had known them, he would have been obliged to declare the fact and disqualify himself from hearing the case. If ever it transpired that a judge had heard a case involving people he knew, it would be automatically appealable and his decision would have to be quashed by the Court of Appeal. No, he didn't know them. But he seems to have made a bad decision on the basis of what you say.
2006-11-29 18:00:48 · answer #2 · answered by Doethineb 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
See a solicitor, you need professional resprentation, appeal becuase on what you say there is no case to answer. Its law rather than anything else which counts in court.
2006-11-30 11:24:08 · answer #3 · answered by logicalawyer 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
... counts for alot mate, the thing that did it was that in a civil claim you only need to prove o the balance of probabilities, not like in criminal which is beyond all reasonable doubt...
so he believed your story 49% he believed there story 51%
2006-11-29 17:13:08 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
nope he just wanted to get on to the golf course. lanch a counter claim and appeal
2006-11-29 17:11:19 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋