BA wins High Court ban on cabin crew strikes

[DirtyHarry]

The high court should not have ridden rough shod over the democratically taken decision to strike by BA workers in the first place.
The fact that a sleazebag like Walsh found it quite easy to have the highest court in the land dancing to his tune, should not be taken lightly by anyone.
Didn't announce the number of spoilt ballot papers???? Poor excuse to spit in the eye of a democratic process, but spit they did.

[brothermagrew]

The high court should not have ridden rough shod over the democratically taken decision to strike by BA workers in the first place.
The fact that a sleazebag like Walsh found it quite easy to have the highest court in the land dancing to his tune, should not be taken lightly by anyone.
Didn't announce the number of spoilt ballot papers???? Poor excuse to spit in the eye of a democratic process, but spit they did.

Bro I think you'll find that the high court is not the highest court in the land.

[heapsy]

I look forward to "BA lodge appeal over unite winning appeal over BA winning High court ban on cabin crew strikes"

And lets not forget the sequal ... At last a judge who shows a bit of common sense.

[BELIAL]

The high court should not have ridden rough shod over the democratically taken decision to strike by BA workers in the first place.
The fact that a sleazebag like Walsh found it quite easy to have the highest court in the land dancing to his tune, should not be taken lightly by anyone.
Didn't announce the number of spoilt ballot papers???? Poor excuse to spit in the eye of a democratic process, but spit they did.

Bro I think you'll find that the high court is not the highest court in the land.

House of Lords is. A plague on all their houses

[brothermagrew]

The high court should not have ridden rough shod over the democratically taken decision to strike by BA workers in the first place.
The fact that a sleazebag like Walsh found it quite easy to have the highest court in the land dancing to his tune, should not be taken lightly by anyone.
Didn't announce the number of spoilt ballot papers???? Poor excuse to spit in the eye of a democratic process, but spit they did.

Bro I think you'll find that the high court is not the highest court in the land.

House of Lords is. A plague on all their houses

Nope it appears now to be the UK Supreme Court

[Geezer]

Have a look here http://www.brutish-airways.com/ and send them an EMail

[BELIAL]

The high court should not have ridden rough shod over the democratically taken decision to strike by BA workers in the first place.
The fact that a sleazebag like Walsh found it quite easy to have the highest court in the land dancing to his tune, should not be taken lightly by anyone.
Didn't announce the number of spoilt ballot papers???? Poor excuse to spit in the eye of a democratic process, but spit they did.

Bro I think you'll find that the high court is not the highest court in the land.

House of Lords is. A plague on all their houses

Nope it appears now to be the UK Supreme Court

You could be right, but I'd check that ,cos the implication is ,we are no longer a monarchic democracy ,and have become a federal autocracy,an no one told us

[brothermagrew]

The high court should not have ridden rough shod over the democratically taken decision to strike by BA workers in the first place.
The fact that a sleazebag like Walsh found it quite easy to have the highest court in the land dancing to his tune, should not be taken lightly by anyone.
Didn't announce the number of spoilt ballot papers???? Poor excuse to spit in the eye of a democratic process, but spit they did.

Bro I think you'll find that the high court is not the highest court in the land.

House of Lords is. A plague on all their houses

Nope it appears now to be the UK Supreme Court

You could be right, but I'd check that ,cos the implication is ,we are no longer a monarchic democracy ,and have become a federal autocracy,an no one told us

Afraid Belial we were told the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (the "Act") made provision for the creation of the new UK Supreme Court. And as to your federal autocracy implication this hopefully may enlighten you.

In 2002 Lord Bingham presented a learned paper commenting on the case for a new Supreme Court, outlining his preferences. In that paper, Lord Bingham pointed out the key difference between the US Supreme Court and the new UK version in these terms:

"To many, mention of a supreme court conjures up visions of the world's best-know Supreme Court, that of the United States, striking down and annulling congressional legislation and asserting primacy of the constitution. I wish to make plain that a supreme court of the United Kingdom could neither claim nor exercise such a power. Under our constitutional dispensation Parliament is sovereign".

[BELIAL]

"To many, mention of a supreme court conjures up visions of the world's best-know Supreme Court, that of the United States, striking down and annulling congressional legislation and asserting primacy of the constitution. I wish to make plain that a supreme court of the United Kingdom could neither claim nor exercise such a power. Under our constitutional dispensation Parliament is sovereign".

House of Lords wins the day then

[brothermagrew]

"To many, mention of a supreme court conjures up visions of the world's best-know Supreme Court, that of the United States, striking down and annulling congressional legislation and asserting primacy of the constitution. I wish to make plain that a supreme court of the United Kingdom could neither claim nor exercise such a power. Under our constitutional dispensation Parliament is sovereign".

House of Lords wins the day then

Well it used to:
The introduction of a Supreme Court for the United Kingdom provides greater clarity in our constitutional arrangements by further separating the judiciary from the legislature.


The UK Supreme Court has assumed the jurisdiction of the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords and the devolution jurisdiction of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.

It is an independent institution, presided over by twelve independently appointed judges, known as Justices of the Supreme Court. The court is housed in the refurbished Middlesex Guildhall on London's Parliament Square - opposite the Houses of Parliament and alongside Westminster Abbey and the Treasury - a fitting location for the apex of the justice system.

The Supreme Court was officially opened at the start of the legal year in October 2009.

The Supreme Court, as well as being the final court of appeal, plays an important role in the development of United Kingdom law.

As an appeal court, The Supreme Court cannot consider a case unless a relevant order has been made in a lower court.

The Supreme Court:

•is the final court of appeal for all United Kingdom civil cases, and criminal cases from England, Wales and Northern Ireland
•hears appeals on arguable points of law of general public importance
•concentrates on cases of the greatest public and constitutional importance
•maintains and develops the role of the highest court in the United Kingdom as a leader in the common law world
The Supreme Court hears appeals from the following courts in each jurisdiction:

England and Wales
•The Court of Appeal, Civil Division
•The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division
•(in some limited cases) the High Court

Scotland
•The Court of Session

Northern Ireland
•The Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland
•(in some limited cases) the High Court

[BELIAL]

Good work BrotherM . I hope people read and digest that and consider the implications.

Despite the assurances of lord Bingham

"To many, mention of a supreme court conjures up visions of the world's best-know Supreme Court, that of the United States, striking down and annulling congressional legislation and asserting primacy of the constitution. I wish to make plain that a supreme court of the United Kingdom could neither claim nor exercise such a power. Under our constitutional dispensation Parliament is sovereign".

it would appear that a major shift in constitutional power has taken place.

The UK Supreme Court has assumed the jurisdiction of the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords and the devolution jurisdiction of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.

and

The Supreme Court:

•is the final court of appeal for all United Kingdom civil cases, and criminal cases from England, Wales and Northern Ireland
•hears appeals on arguable points of law of general public importance
•concentrates on cases of the greatest public and constitutional importance

This bit sounds like a fine idea

The introduction of a Supreme Court for the United Kingdom provides greater clarity in our constitutional arrangements by further separating the judiciary from the legislature.

but given our political masters love of doublespeak and deception, I'd be concerned especially since

It is an independent institution, presided over by twelve independently appointed judges, known as Justices of the Supreme Court.

The people that control the appointment of judges effectively control the law of the land , and if they are politicians ,then there is not much separating going on .
Interesting stuff given the times that are fast approaching.
Any ideas or suggestions for finding out about the appointments procedure?

[brothermagrew]

You may find your answer in here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Co ... ed_Kingdom" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[BELIAL]

Interesting BrotherM. !12 supreme court judges deliberating over every legal aspect of our lives, 6 from Cambridge, 5 from Oxford ,1 from Belfast. Doesn't look too reperesentative
Funny that when a vacancy crops up ,the supreme court gets to choose a new member , makes our union look like a paragon of democracy. No mention of the initial selection process but I'd hazard a guess not one resident of Toxteth or Broadwater Farm got a say

[brothermagrew]

On the commencement of the Supreme Court in October 2009, all current Law Lords became its first Justices.

The first Justices remain Members of the House of Lords, but are unable to sit and vote in the House. All new Justices appointed after October 2009 will be directly appointed to The Supreme Court on the recommendation of a selection commission.

[brothermagrew]

Back to basics the original High Court Injunction - http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2010/B4.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;