Theyre not fines - so thats fine
Sunday Telegraph
Christopher Booker's Notebook
Government officials across the land will have heaved a sigh of relief last week at a High Court ruling by Mr Justice Andrew Collins, which gives them the power to impose arbitrary penalties on the public without having to justify them in a court of law.
Robin de Crittenden is the Walsall pensioner who challenged the right of councils and private companies, under the 1991 Road Traffic Act, to impose parking penalties without giving motorists any right to argue their case in court. Mr de Crittenden, supported by campaigner Neil Herron of the Metric Martyrs Defence Fund, argued that this was in breach of the 1689 Bill of Rights, which lays down that all "fines and forfeitures" before conviction in court are "illegal and void".
The implications of this case were enormous, because not only are 7 million of these fines imposed each year on motorists, but other branches of government have in recent years exploited the same system by introducing automatic penalties for a range of offences, such as the late return of forms or taxes.
Mr Justice Collins cut through all this confusion by the simple device of ruling that a "penalty" is not a "fine" or "forfeiture". No matter that the dictionary defines a fine as "a monetary penalty", a forfeit as "a fine" or "penalty" and a penalty as "a fine", the good judge clearly belongs to the Humpty Dumpty school of lawmaking, based on the principle "When I use a word it means just what I choose it to mean".
Not only does this ruling retrospectively save councils tens of million of pounds, it also vastly increases the powers of officialdom to levy penalties for anything that offends them, by taking away the citizen's right to challenge them.
Maybe David Cameron has a point in claiming that we need a new Bill of Rights, because clearly the old one, on the say-so of Mr Justice Collins, has just been chucked in the bin.
Yet it is only four years since Lord Justice Laws found the "metric martyrs" guilty on the grounds that certain Acts of Parliament, including the Bill of Rights and the European Communities Act, were "constitutional statutes" so fundamental to our law that they could not be subsequently overruled.
Comments
What is a fine?
The Oxford dictionary defines Forfeit/Forfeiture:"Something surrendered as a penalty"
If a £60 parking penalty charge isn't a forfeiture then nothing is!
1. Buy the illustrious judge a dictionary.
2. If he's right and it ISN'T a forfeiture then you don't have to pay it!
ALSO
Asset Forfeiture Law Firm
The Centre for Forfeiture Law is a part of the law firm of Montgomery Blair Sibley, Chartered which provides legal counsel to those whose property the government seeks to take and forfeit.
civilforfeiture,com
Christopher Booker's Notebook
Government officials across the land will have heaved a sigh of relief last week at a High Court ruling by Mr Justice Andrew Collins, which gives them the power to impose arbitrary penalties on the public without having to justify them in a court of law.
Robin de Crittenden is the Walsall pensioner who challenged the right of councils and private companies, under the 1991 Road Traffic Act, to impose parking penalties without giving motorists any right to argue their case in court. Mr de Crittenden, supported by campaigner Neil Herron of the Metric Martyrs Defence Fund, argued that this was in breach of the 1689 Bill of Rights, which lays down that all "fines and forfeitures" before conviction in court are "illegal and void".
The implications of this case were enormous, because not only are 7 million of these fines imposed each year on motorists, but other branches of government have in recent years exploited the same system by introducing automatic penalties for a range of offences, such as the late return of forms or taxes.
Mr Justice Collins cut through all this confusion by the simple device of ruling that a "penalty" is not a "fine" or "forfeiture". No matter that the dictionary defines a fine as "a monetary penalty", a forfeit as "a fine" or "penalty" and a penalty as "a fine", the good judge clearly belongs to the Humpty Dumpty school of lawmaking, based on the principle "When I use a word it means just what I choose it to mean".
Not only does this ruling retrospectively save councils tens of million of pounds, it also vastly increases the powers of officialdom to levy penalties for anything that offends them, by taking away the citizen's right to challenge them.
Maybe David Cameron has a point in claiming that we need a new Bill of Rights, because clearly the old one, on the say-so of Mr Justice Collins, has just been chucked in the bin.
Yet it is only four years since Lord Justice Laws found the "metric martyrs" guilty on the grounds that certain Acts of Parliament, including the Bill of Rights and the European Communities Act, were "constitutional statutes" so fundamental to our law that they could not be subsequently overruled.
Comments
What is a fine?
The Oxford dictionary defines Forfeit/Forfeiture:"Something surrendered as a penalty"
If a £60 parking penalty charge isn't a forfeiture then nothing is!
1. Buy the illustrious judge a dictionary.
2. If he's right and it ISN'T a forfeiture then you don't have to pay it!
ALSO
Asset Forfeiture Law Firm
The Centre for Forfeiture Law is a part of the law firm of Montgomery Blair Sibley, Chartered which provides legal counsel to those whose property the government seeks to take and forfeit.
civilforfeiture,com
posted by Neil Herron at 12:20 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home