red84 Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Will common sense prevail? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy082005 Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Where did you hear this?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riaz Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-17539187 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lew-T Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 What's more likely to happen do you think? 60/40 in favour for a review? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 hammond who is against the ground is crying out about a public inquiry and it going to a fresh inspector this morning could he be scared of it going in our favour? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCAGFC Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 hammond who is against the ground is crying out about a public inquiry and it going to a fresh inspector this morning could he be scared of it going in our favour? Who is Hammond?......new name to me. BCAGFC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Who is Hammond?......new name to me. BCAGFC Richard? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lrrr Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 I can see it just getting passed off to the JR tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCAGFC Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 hammond who is against the ground is crying out about a public inquiry and it going to a fresh inspector this morning could he be scared of it going in our favour? Is Peter Hammond against the ground?, his comments in that piece on Bristol 24/7 doesn't indicate one way or another. If the JR happens and it has to go back to the BCC PROW committee, the new evidence has to go to the original Inspector as if it didn't, it would give the NIMBYs another avenue of appeal. To get us out of this mess, BCC PROW ask Ross Crail to view the new evidence, she will probably make the same ruling and then the council can just make the same split decision and register it correctly & accurately. The NIMBYs could try to appeal but there is no legal obligation to accept an Inspectors report as Ms Crail states at the bottom of her rerport. BCAGFC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philly The Kid Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 I would be surprised if the judge didn't let it go to a judicial review given what's at stake. He could reason that by allowing it to go to JR, a full and final decision on the legality of the due process can be made, and both parties would then know one way or the other. It's hard to be critical of the council who have been very supportive in the proposed stadium, but you can't help but feel they haven't done their legal home work properly and made sure they presented a watertight case. The slightest whiff of any appeal, and those who seek to delay the inevitable will take the opportunity. The decision should be made once and for all so that both parties can move forward. Either we get to build it, or we don't. the delaying tactics (for that is what they are) are simply a mechanism that gives the nimbys hope that SL will lose interest and bail out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Is Peter Hammond against the ground?, his comments in that piece on Bristol 24/7 doesn't indicate one way or another. If the JR happens and it has to go back to the BCC PROW committee, the new evidence has to go to the original Inspector as if it didn't, it would give the NIMBYs another avenue of appeal. To get us out of this mess, BCC PROW ask Ross Crail to view the new evidence, she will probably make the same ruling and then the council can just make the same split decision and register it correctly & accurately. The NIMBYs could try to appeal but there is no legal obligation to accept an Inspectors report as Ms Crail states at the bottom of her rerport. BCAGFC the thing is the council have brought rules in now so it doesn't have to go to the inspector so if it does go to the PROW then they could say that none of it meets requirements and we could get all 42 acres what with new planning laws and new TVG coming in this delay by the nimbys can be very costly for them as well as they would be left with the council's legal costs now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eskay Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 the thing is the council have brought rules in now so it doesn't have to go to the inspector so if it does go to the PROW then they could say that none of it meets requirements and we could get all 42 acres what with new planning laws and new TVG coming in this delay by the nimbys can be very costly for them as well as they would be left with the council's legal costs now Wouldn't that be bloody great!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Wouldn't that be bloody great!!! not likely to happen but i would love it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philly The Kid Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 I don't believe it's retrospective, and even if they did, it would be open to challenge. It makes sense for the whole thing to go to the highest chamber where a full and final decision can be made. It will take a while, but will be shorter in the long term. Learn by the mistakes and experiences of Brighton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 I don't believe it's retrospective, and even if they did, it would be open to challenge. It makes sense for the whole thing to go to the highest chamber where a full and final decision can be made. It will take a while, but will be shorter in the long term. Learn by the mistakes and experiences of Brighton. If it goes back to the PROW commity its a fresh call so it wouldn't be retrospective Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy082005 Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Even if by some miracle they turn the nimbys down.....bet they can appeal it?....again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lrrr Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Even if by some miracle they turn the nimbys down.....bet they can appeal it?....again Don't think so, think if it's turned down we can start building Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bar BS3 Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Tbh, I think to some level this whole stadium/TVG shambles has distracted everyone from the one REALLY important battle that we can actually try and control at the moment. Let's worry about what can be influenced over the next 4 weeks or so and just let this TVG farce sort itself out and worry about it in the summer or when a decision has been reached! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy082005 Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Don't think so, think if it's turned down we can start building Well we can start building now I think....it's just if we lose, we have to put it back how it was Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS3_RED Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 A review was already ordered, so we know there are legal grounds for it. What has changed is whether the current claim can continue or restarted. If it can then the JD will restart as the judge in June decided there were grounds for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lew-T Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 It might not be so straight forward as people are thinking here. If it was going to a review, surely they would of made the decision when it was supposed to be made? Just a thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BristolBEAT Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Don't think so, think if it's turned down we can start building Don't think this is entirely true either. I think it can be passed onto the Minister (Who has Final Final say) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bs3 Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Don't think this is entirely true either. I think it can be passed onto the Minister (Who has Final Final say) No you are wrong in this case there is no minister involved so if the judgement goes our way on Monday we can start to build. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6oclockcrew Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Note...... Is DUE Monday, we all know it wont be done and dusted yet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickolas Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Well we can start building now I think....it's just if we lose, we have to put it back how it was Im not sure we could recreate the perfect flatness of their bowling green village green tho! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristol.chris Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 Tbh, I think to some level this whole stadium/TVG shambles has distracted everyone from the one REALLY important battle that we can actually try and control at the moment. Let's worry about what can be influenced over the next 4 weeks or so and just let this TVG farce sort itself out and worry about it in the summer or when a decision has been reached! +1. The next 4 weeks of what happens on the pitch are the most important thing at this moment. Let's leave the TVG farce till the end of the season now. Hopefully it will give the forum something to chat about in the summer months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldfield Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 COURT 37 Before MR JUSTICE UNDERHILL Monday 2 April, 2012 At 10 o’clock FOR JUDGMENT HAND DOWN CO/1836/2012 The Queen on the application of Abc v Vence Llp CO/8686/2011 The Queen on the application of Sdr v Vence Llp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.