Jump to content
boris1066

Save Sankey Valley Park

Recommended Posts

Good post culedude and now I understand :wink:

 

Very wise to keep things close to your chest and don't tell to many 'people' within your group exactly what you are doing either as from past experience it's suprising how many spies you can get willing to 'help'. I'm trying to be subtle there :oops::lol:

 

Good luck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good post culedude and now I understand :wink:

 

Very wise to keep things close to your chest and don't tell to many 'people' within your group exactly what you are doing either as from past experience it's suprising how many spies you can get willing to 'help'. I'm trying to be subtle there :oops::lol:

 

Good luck

 

Thanks for your understanding Dizzy, I realise discretion is everything and we'll be very careful. We now just need support by way of donations on the website, every penny will be accounted for and full disclosure is assure once the goal is reached.

 

www.savesankeyvalleypark.com

Please donate and support the park

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cant keep it quiet forever. Once you apply for whatever it is you are applying for, expect a counter application or blocking application. Be very careful as to who funds that application as you could leave yourself open for a personal liability for costs. It is not unknown for an application to be made for security as to costs. This could get very expensive very quick and very messy for thus funding it.

 

BTW at my rates ?750 would get you just under 4 hours work. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont get the link between my comments and the sudden need to raise funds. The comment cautioned that those applying could become personally liable for the costs of GW. If this gets to appeal, ?1800 wouldnt get you in the court never mind to make your point.

 

I hope those who are doing this have deep pockets not just to pay their legal fees but potentially GW's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont and have only suggested that they could be.

However lets say whatever action they take has a potential to restrict the ability of GW to expand / develop. Do you expect GW to take it lying down. If they appoint lawyers to fight it and win do you suppose those lawyers will act pro bono? They'll simply seek to recover those costs from those who took the action. The court may order that those who lost do. Its certainly within their powers to do so.

 

Its not definite but is a posibility hence the reference to "could" in the previous post. The lawyer they are hiring will i trust advise them accordingly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AdrianR is right.

 

The only thing that stopped another local issue going all the way was the slight 'possibility' of failing. Solicitors were consulted and in the end it went to a barrister (at a high cost). Based on very strong facts and findings and other issues the barrister concluded there was a very strong chance that the 'Save' group would succeed in court BUT had to advise that there was also a small chance that they may not as with any case.

 

That would have resulted in costs in the region of ?30k+ payable by the 'Save' people to the other party.

 

It was not persued for that one small reason.... The 'Save' people could not chance it after all who on earth has ?30k+ to risk other than councils, developers or very profitable business owners 8)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How do you know they would become personally liable when don't even know legally what they're doing?

 

I personally know of a couple of people who tried to fight the Creamfields issue, who got hit for costs so be very careful. Life is not as straightforward as we might want it to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd assume the strength of community argument / objections / past history with GW would significantly mitigate a judge passing costs on. In addition I heard someone mention early on in this thread about a community getting legal aid in a York case. Don't know what that was but it's something for the SSVP group to explore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Page 2 explanation... posted by SHA on 30 April.

 

Mentioned nearly a month ago, I would hope the SSVP have already looked into this although admitidly this was at judicial review stage so some way off that at the moment eh :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...