Cyprus-Forum.com

[Viewpoint]

Kifeas all we hear is that our side is ready and that it is the GCs that are holding things up, thats why I mentioned before Moller should expose to the UN the real facts so that the side that is dragging its feet may be revealed. Its is far from transparent at the moment and I unilke you will hold off blaming either side.

[elko]

Elko, It is obvious that you are the one initiating a propaganda campaign -here and elsewhere, by distributing false information that Apostolides appeal was made only for the costs of the previous judgment and not on the findings, when you have been told already that this is not the case. You even quoted a line from a Reuters report that was made on the day of the judgment - a month ago, and which represents the opinion of the reporter (what does he know?) so that you back up your propaganda with “facts.”

Kifeas, I am interested in hard facts and not your propaganda. I will be very pleased if you can point me to any hard facts, any links and so on. I have taken your statement into consideration as well but please allow me the wisdom not to rely on it and seek further proof.
I understand your disappointment with the Orams decision in UK, but those like me who do know something how the courts work have not been surprised. I predicted this outcome well in advance. If you have noticed, I always try to justify my predictions based on hard facts and sound knowledge of the law.
ismet

[Kifeas]

Elko, It is obvious that you are the one initiating a propaganda campaign -here and elsewhere, by distributing false information that Apostolides appeal was made only for the costs of the previous judgment and not on the findings, when you have been told already that this is not the case. You even quoted a line from a Reuters report that was made on the day of the judgment - a month ago, and which represents the opinion of the reporter (what does he know?) so that you back up your propaganda with “facts.”

Kifeas, I am interested in hard facts and not your propaganda. I will be very pleased if you can point me to any hard facts, any links and so on. I have taken your statement into consideration as well but please allow me the wisdom not to rely on it and seek further proof.
I understand your disappointment with the Orams decision in UK, but those like me who do know something how the courts work have not been surprised. I predicted this outcome well in advance. If you have noticed, I always try to justify my predictions based on hard facts and sound knowledge of the law.
ismet

And what "hard facts" do you have to claim that Apostolides appealed only against the costs, and not against the findings of the judgment as well, when I happen to personally know by fact that he indeed appeal against the findings?

[elko]

There are conflicting arguments about this. Was the appeal on costs only or on the merits of the decision? It seems to be all very quiet. The inference??
ismet

The heading I used here to initiate this discussion is "Did Apostolides appeal on costs only?" I backed this up with what I wrote as quoted above.
Now, please let us have a little bit of comprehension test:
a) Elko claims that the appeal is on costs only,
b) Elko claims that the appeal covers the main findings,
c) Elko is not sure about the position and is asking for more information,
d) Elko claims none of the above,
e) Elko claims that there is not sufficient reliable information available but lack of information implies that there is no appeal on the main issue.

You can tick one or more of the above.

This is just a simple test for you Kifeas. You answer it and I will ask the admin or our lovely lady Lana do the marking. He/she will decide whether you pass the test or not.
ismet

[Kifeas]

There are conflicting arguments about this. Was the appeal on costs only or on the merits of the decision? It seems to be all very quiet. The inference??
ismet

The heading I used here to initiate this discussion is "Did Apostolides appeal on costs only?" I backed this up with what I wrote as quoted above.
Now, please let us have a little bit of comprehension test:
a) Elko claims that the appeal is on costs only,
b) Elko claims that the appeal covers the main findings,
c) Elko is not sure about the position and is asking for more information,
d) Elko claims none of the above,
e) Elko claims that there is not sufficient reliable information available but lack of information implies that there is no appeal on the main issue.

You can tick one or more of the above.

This is just a simple test for you Kifeas. You answer it and I will ask the admin or our lovely lady Lana do the marking. He/she will decide whether you pass the test or not.
ismet

You missed one last choice, which is the one representing the correct answer

g) Elko is trying to make cleverish propaganda.


Why you did not instead ask in your initial post the following: "for what purpose did Apostolides appeal the judgment?"

[Pyrpolizer]

I also have a question for those residing in UK and presumably knowing more than us of the legal system there.
Suppose Apostolides wins the appeal. Will he still have to pay those 800,000???
I mean its like someone says you are wrong-pay, and then a higher authority says "no he is no wrong".
So to make a long story short , it seems to me the matter of the financial cost should also relate to the appeal.

Any information?

[Pyrpolizer]

Elko I don't remember anyone with your nick on the "Cyprus list". I assume you refer to the list where Durduran is a member.

[elko]

Elko I don't remember anyone with your nick on the "Cyprus list". I assume you refer to the list where Durduran is a member.

I always sign as "ismet" and my full name that appears on top is "ismet üstüner".
Durduran, Panayiotis, Pantelis, Marios, Unal, Barry, Hakan etc. etc., we are in very good company.

Now the costs. If the Higher Court overturns the decison of the lower court, they usually order on costs too i.e. reverse the costs but it is entirely up to them.
ismet

[elko]

I just had it confirmed from a member of Oram's defence team that the appeal of Apostolides is agains the merits of the whole decision. No we know for certain.
ismet

[Pyrpolizer]

I always sign as "ismet" and my full name that appears on top is "ismet u"stu"ner".
Durduran, Panayiotis, Pantelis, Marios, Unal, Barry, Hakan etc. etc., we are in very good company.

Thanks. I now remembered you. I was a member too but never posted anything.Was only reading...

As for the costs I was not referring to the costs of the appeal. I was referring to the already attributed costs of the lower court. How about them?