Cyprus-Forum.com

[bill cobbett]

Jerry koumbaro,

Can I also say, and we touched on this earlier today, how little the Court knew of some pretty basic facts of the CyProb. Not the contentious ones, like how many refugees there are from each community.

It really was interesting that of the six people who spoke today, three High Court Judges and three QCs, the most knowledgeable, I thought, was the Witch!

These people may be very, very knowledgeable about legal procedure but I do fear their knowledge of CY is not what is expected. So I guess it doesn't come down to right or wrong ... Or justice .

It's so much about procedure. Have the Orams demonstrated that there is a legal avenue to go back to the ECJ? That's the question I'm asking myself tonight.

[-mikkie2-]

I think that the Orams lawyers are clutching at straws here if they are trying to push the political aspect of the problem or making accusations of bias of some of the ECJ judges.

The court should not take political considerations into account here. The fact remains that even if a solution is found, if that solution does not recognise the rights of the original landowners then court cases will continue to be made. No politician can sign away the basic human rights of individuals.

Anyway, we shall see what transpires tomorrow. I think we will not get a clear cut conclusion unless Kantounas makes a persuasive argument tomorrow. Even though he has right on his side he will need to rubbish the argument of the Orams laywers and do so convinsingly which I think he is very able to do.

[bill cobbett]

I think that the Orams lawyers are clutching at straws here if they are trying to push the political aspect of the problem or making accusations of bias of some of the ECJ judges.

The court should not take political considerations into account here. The fact remains that even if a solution is found, if that solution does not recognise the rights of the original landowners then court cases will continue to be made. No politician can sign away the basic human rights of individuals.

Anyway, we shall see what transpires tomorrow. I think we will not get a clear cut conclusion unless Kantounas makes a persuasive argument tomorrow. Even though he has right on his side he will need to rubbish the argument of the Orams laywers and do so convinsingly which I think he is very able to do.

Hi Mikkie,

Regretfully Mr Candonow won't be doing any of the speaking tomorrow. That will be done by Mr A's barrister, a QC who seemed to know his law stuff, but is a bit soft-spoken.

May or may not be a judgement tomorrow. They've got a lot to get through.

[YFred]

I think that the Orams lawyers are clutching at straws here if they are trying to push the political aspect of the problem or making accusations of bias of some of the ECJ judges.

The court should not take political considerations into account here. The fact remains that even if a solution is found, if that solution does not recognise the rights of the original landowners then court cases will continue to be made. No politician can sign away the basic human rights of individuals.

Anyway, we shall see what transpires tomorrow. I think we will not get a clear cut conclusion unless Kantounas makes a persuasive argument tomorrow. Even though he has right on his side he will need to rubbish the argument of the Orams laywers and do so convinsingly which I think he is very able to do.

Hi Mikkie,

Regretfully Mr Candonow won't be doing any of the speaking tomorrow. That will be done by Mr A's barrister, a QC who seemed to know his law stuff, but is a bit soft-spoken.

May or may not be a judgement tomorrow. They've got a lot to get through.

Blind leading the blind comes to mind. You'd think that if there is a slightest chance that this will kill the peace process, the old judge would have to common sense to ring Mr Downer to ask his opinion. I wonder, will the honourable judge attend will full dress today, including the stockings and suspenders?
Bill we would like full description today, none of that biased crap you delivered yesterday old boy.
PS, Jerry should seek some help.

[bill cobbett]

Your Intrepid Duo have joined the queque to get in to the Court.

No show again from Ombangoed! !!! There are Press outside the Court.

Rah Fredoulla, we're posting honest reports, you should appreciate this IMHO.

[denizaksulu]

The Blur Witch has that silly cheshire cat smile so something is amusing her.

Er Regretfully jerry says he finds her shaggable!

A camel looks better than her. What taste the mans got.

[CopperLine]

Jerry koumbaro,

Can I also say, and we touched on this earlier today, how little the Court knew of some pretty basic facts of the CyProb. Not the contentious ones, like how many refugees there are from each community.

It really was interesting that of the six people who spoke today, three High Court Judges and three QCs, the most knowledgeable, I thought, was the Witch!

These people may be very, very knowledgeable about legal procedure but I do fear their knowledge of CY is not what is expected. So I guess it doesn't come down to right or wrong ... Or justice .

It's so much about procedure. Have the Orams demonstrated that there is a legal avenue to go back to the ECJ? That's the question I'm asking myself tonight.

Bill Cobbett,
The court is not interested in the Cyprus Problem and that is why it will not be discussed. Especially at this appeal stage, and after the ECJ judgment, the issue is purely procedural. The appeal judges are only concerned now with the correctness and propriety of procedure, they are not concerned with any of the substantive issues. This is why, it seems, that Orams' counsel is pushing the q. of ECJ fairness or political bias. She has to try and show that the ECJ has failed or made an error in procedure which would cause the appeal court judges to doubt the propriety of the ECJ judgment. It is a very long shot, but frankly is the only thing she's got, because the substantive aspects of Apostelides v Orams cannot be opened up again.

[grokked]

You're both doing a briliant job - I for one am glued to your reporting.

Keep up the good work

[B25]

Jerry koumbaro,

Can I also say, and we touched on this earlier today, how little the Court knew of some pretty basic facts of the CyProb. Not the contentious ones, like how many refugees there are from each community.

It really was interesting that of the six people who spoke today, three High Court Judges and three QCs, the most knowledgeable, I thought, was the Witch!

These people may be very, very knowledgeable about legal procedure but I do fear their knowledge of CY is not what is expected. So I guess it doesn't come down to right or wrong ... Or justice .

It's so much about procedure. Have the Orams demonstrated that there is a legal avenue to go back to the ECJ? That's the question I'm asking myself tonight.

Bill Cobbett,
The court is not interested in the Cyprus Problem and that is why it will not be discussed. Especially at this appeal stage, and after the ECJ judgment, the issue is purely procedural. The appeal judges are only concerned now with the correctness and propriety of procedure, they are not concerned with any of the substantive issues. This is why, it seems, that Orams' counsel is pushing the q. of ECJ fairness or political bias. She has to try and show that the ECJ has failed or made an error in procedure which would cause the appeal court judges to doubt the propriety of the ECJ judgment. It is a very long shot, but frankly is the only thing she's got, because the substantive aspects of Apostelides v Orams cannot be opened up again.

Hello Mr Copperline,

I would like to ask you a couple of simple questions.

1. Assuming that there was no bias (and I am not saying there was) with the ECJ ruling, can the UK appeal judges still disregard it and rule as THEY see fit??


2. Even though one of the Judges was Greek, do YOU as a legal eagle still think that the whole ECJ ruling could have been made the way it was because of this??

(Remembering that Bananiot claims to be a GC as well and would the complaining TCs on CF object if he was the judge in that case??)

I look forward to your expert reply.

Thanks

[GeorgeV97qaue]

Hmm, I predict a wishy washy conclusion from the judge, one that pleases no one!

I think it is very thin for the Orams to essentially claim that the ECJ judge is biased when the Orams have as their representative the wife of a former PM!

The face that the judge was Greek is a clear sign of biased...clear for all to see, would you accept it if he was Turkish and the decision went against you GCs?

VP its all about justice nothing to do with being biased. As soon as a decision goes against TC's you call foul.

You are the ones that occupy our land remember GC land not TC. So how can you make your stupid statements. Tirkey does what it like and then when we have a greek judge you call foul. Easy way to resolve this is agree to give back our property. Turkey will then get into the EU and then you can have a judge as well until then shut up you mug.