Taxi Driver Online

ulterior motive
an objection has to be based in facts
tbh i hope the council lets it in,more power to me.
and about as much affect as city,centrals multi paged objection drafted by thier solicitor the last time and you know what happened that time .

2 in the bag

btw way i can think of a thousand things you cant do

Me too It's the things i can do that counts You can compile a list if you like

_________________
Alway's been about Tightening the Grip!

thats handy
has it been usefull

One of the things that i'm good at is driving a Taxi on a Fri-Saturday night without FEAR Is that one of the things your good at AliT I know the answer no need for a postcard

_________________
Alway's been about Tightening the Grip!

i havent driven a taxi for 9 months

thiers no money in it

im doing somit else

you should try doing one of the hundreds of other things your good at,or was that just as we all suspect wishfull thinking

im doing somit else



Say's it all about you AliT

_________________
Alway's been about Tightening the Grip!

So if it's all above board then where's the defamation?

How does what he said damage you or your wife's reputation?

I mean, if the press reported that I'd applied for a taxi licence in Barrow-in-Furness when I hadn't then I'd perhaps ask for a correction, but I can't see how it could be construed as defamatory.

You seem to be arguing against yourself, Ali - if the errors in the objection result in it being defamatory then to that extent you must think applying for and selling plates amounts to a stain on someone's character.

Can't wait to hear you counsel expain why you think it's defamatory

yep not daft enough to stay in a job that pays me [edited by admin] unlike you.

dusty its a malicious objection

it may well not be defamatory but its certainly not a positive.

do you think if the objection is allowed in then it would be seen as a positive in support of the application,surely not!

that said he will be given the chance to defend his action,not that i believe their are any its just ignorance.

i said in my post that its about making him pay in court,
we can all make stupid ignorant statements, me included.
but for every action their is a reaction
this guy has put pen to paper and issued what amounts to or was intended to cast a bad light on the applicant or put influence on councilors who are just as ignorant as him to the facts surrounding licensing matters,although he is factually incorrect as he does not have the courage to post on here and explain his actions,perhaps you could explain exactly what the perceived problem is as i detect from your implication that you to have a problem with the application at least to some degree.


perhaps you can shed some light on the matter from your perspective of course,im not asking you to explain his opinions or reasoning behind the objection,in fact i doubt he really knows why he objected if he did he certainly never managed to get it across in his objection

their will be no counsel, party litigant.
as i said if you had read my post properly its about making him pay.
not about me dipping into my pockets.

Now you don't seem so sure that it is defamatory. When has any objection been a positive? That is the whole point of an objection.
As I see it the objection would not be admissable anyway because of the time limit.

_________________
Grandad,

i never was sure and no one on here is either including you as none of us are solicitors

what i am sure about is its intent


and this guy should make no mistake about mine

your right of course it is a late objection and shouldn't be allowed in but im pretty sure it will be,which will confirm to me its malicious intent.
btw the committee is not a court of law and thats precisely whats wrong with it

All sounds like the usual jocularity on here, but if you were seriously considering raising proceedings, one or two things you may wish to consider:

1 - You would have no title to sue, as any comments made were not in relation to you, but rather your wife.

2 - A letter of objection would almost certainly achieve qualified privilege and so malice would require to be established, by the pursuer.

3 - The messages which you have posted on here could perhaps be used to show that your wife was abusing the court process by raising proceedings for the purposes solely of putting a defender to expense. Such could attract an award of expenses on an agent/client basis, which would mean you pay all the monies paid by the defender to his legal team.

4 - Calling someone a retard could qualify as a defamatory statement if it caused damage to their reputation, or was malicious.

5 - Defamation in Scotland does indeed cover the written and spoken word (Libel/Slander in E&W and other common law jurisdictions)

6 - Struggling to find any injurious imputation on character or reputation in the letter complained of. If, as is suggested, there have been previous instances of plates being acquired purely for profit and there can be shown to be a connection between you and your wife in relation to the application, which in my view would be possible given the inference to be drawn from the comments on this website and even this thread, then it appears to me that the information is based on fact.

There is simply no defamatory material here, so maybe best not to waste your own and the court's time with this.

NB. The Committee may consider an objection even when late, if it resolves to do so.

perhaps you should read my posts more carefully

i hold myself to account for what i do should i expect any less from anyone else
an eye for an eye as they say

any way its all by the by as far as the application goes

there was demand when applied,and as their was only one live application then im afraid that is all she wrote as far as a courts concerned.

if the 17 previously refused apps that are on appeal and being heard today are granted today (which very looks likely).

then i predict that when my wifes application goes up for consideration that they will claim that no plates are available as the one that was available was issued to the 17 that they release today.
refused no unmet demand.

can anyone work out why that wont work ???

Everyone has the right to object to a licence.
It's for the committee to decide whether the objection is competent.
Having read it, IMO it is not competent and they should just throw it out.
If they don't, take it to the sheriff. I'm pretty sure the courts will.
The objector should have saved himself the trouble and the cost of a stamp.

As for defamatory, I see very little that is actionable in it.
Was this objection in the public domain before you posted it on here?
If it wasn't, you may have done more harm to your or you spouse's reputation by publishing it.
Any action which is defended could end up costing you big time in legal costs. Remember Skull & Jasbar V Coolky and co?
I'd just let it go, it's not worth it.

_________________

http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/