magikthrill wrote:erol,
again...
the innocent victims who lost their lives was a tragic thing no doubt. but this is in the past. the property issue is of the present and of the future.
thats what makes the two situatoins so different...
Not again, victims who killed was tragic and past.The property was past and tragic to.Can you give my father back to me as a child i saw him killed front of me, can you give my child hood back i grow with out father nooooooooooooomagikthrill wrote:erol,
again...
the innocent victims who lost their lives was a tragic thing no doubt. but this is in the past. the property issue is of the present and of the future.
thats what makes the two situatoins so different...
again property appears to be number one priority for GCs not lives or safety, very strange.
somewhat difficult since under English law a claim against one owner of a property cannot be enforced if the other owner is not involved in whatever claim is being made. For example, a bank cannot foreclose on the joint property of a debtor if the debtor does not have sole title. The mistake made here by the GC lawyer is that he can hope for only half an order, and half ain't worth anything
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest