How many times in the last 3 years has Judge McKenna ignored the official advice that a case can not be 're-heard

Yn disgwyl am adolygiad mewnol gan Gwasanaeth Llysoedd a Thribiwnlysoedd EM o'u triniaeth o'r cais hwn.

Dear Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service,
1) How many times in the last 3 years has Chamber President Judge Alison McKenna decided to ignore the official statement issued to people appealing an ICO Decision Notice which is that 'it's not possible to re-hear a case', and instead gone ahead, and decided to re-hear the case?
If it's happened on so many occasions that gathering the information would exceed the spending limits on responding to an FOI Request, please reduce the term to 2 years. If that's still too costly, reduce it to 15 months.

[Background: I know for a fact this has happened on AT LEAST one occasion when Judge McKenna decided to re-hear a case - in defiance of the official statement accompanying her Ruling on Feb 20 2019 which stated categorically: 'it is not possible to re-hear a case'. She then went on to reach the decision as the Registrar but gave as her reason something the Registrar failed to mention].

2) On how many occasions in the last 3 years has Chamber President Judge McKenna suffered an extraordinary memory lapse? Like, for example, the one she had in her Ruling of a case on 20 Feb 2019 where she falsely stated that the GRC Registrar had rejected an appellant's appeal against an ICO Decision because they'd failed to demonstrate 'an error in law' in the Decision. The Registrar had, in fact, made absolutely no mention of 'error in law' in her Ruling.

NB The purpose of this FOI Request is to establish whether the judge has been prone to severe memory lapses in the past, and - if that is the case - whether the pubic interest might best be served by her being granted another period of sickness leave.

3) How many times in the last 3 years has Chamber president Judge Alison McKenna failed to disclose a conflict of interest and recuse herself from hearing and ruling on a case that raises the same issues as one she's ruled on shortly before?

[Background: I know for a fact that this has happened on AT LEAST one occasion, namely when she decided not to disclose a conflict of interest in July, and hear an Out of Time application to the Upper Tribunal by Dudley Jones (which she then rejected!). This was directly related to an appeal by Dudley Jones against an ICO Decision she'd re-heard and ruled on in Feb 2019. Of course, this may have been ANOTHER MEMORY LOSS by Judge McKenna. She may have simply forgotten she'd ruled on Dudley Jones' case 5 months earlier. Or, indeed, she'd weighed up all the facts, and decided there was no conflict of interest involved so she'd hear it itself rather than ask one of the other 19 judges employed by the GRC to hear this particular Out of Time application. It may, indeed, have been a regular practice for her to hear Out of Time applications.

Yours faithfully,

Dudley Jones

Gadawodd taryn taylor anodiad ()

I am seriously thinking about writing to the Queen. Why? Because as she is the Head of the Church of England. So, she MUST believe in JUSTICE, TRUTH, HONOUR etc..as I do to!
Given that judges & all persons holding a public office ie; police, MP's, civil servants etc etc.. are supposedly taking an Oath upon their appointment? The first part of this Oath , has a part in it to HONOUR the Queen. The second part has the well known phrase
"WITHOUT FEAR or FAVOUR". So my question is ; Why are these greedy, lazy, incompetent people allowed to stay in their positions.? They are dishonouring the Oath that they took, which in turn is being DISHONOURABLE to the QUEEN. And they have obviously FORGOTTEN the REAL meaning of "WITHOUT FEAR"- to them it means "DON'T HAVE TO FEAR BEING DISCIPLINED OR PROSECUTED" as they outnumber the "good ones?" And "FAVOUR" means to "SCRATCH THEIR MATES BACK"?
The true meaning is to be GENUINELY IMPARTIAL!!
And as I have already made requests to various judicial depts. on this site regarding their Oath. I am Not surprised that none of them wanted to answer my FOI request.They obviously did not know what I was talking about!

GRC, Gwasanaeth Llysoedd a Thribiwnlysoedd EM

1 Atodiad

Dear Mr Jones,

 

Please see the attached response to your FOIA request.

 

Administrative Team

General Regulatory Chamber Tribunals & Gender Recognition Panel | HMCTS |
PO BOX 9300 | Leicester | LE1 8DJ

Phone: 0300 123 4504

Web:
[1]www.gov.uk/courts-tribunals/first-tier-tribunal-general-regulatory-chamber

 

For information on how HMCTS uses personal data about you please see:
[2]https://www.gov.uk/government/organisati...

 

I am not authorised to bind my department contractually, nor to make
representations or other statements which may bind the department in any
way via electronic means

 

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Dear Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service's handling of my FOI request 'How many times in the last 3 years has Judge McKenna ignored the official advice that a case can not be 're-heard'.
Dear Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service's handling of my FOI request 'How many times in the last 3 years has Judge McKenna ignored the official advice that a case can not be 're-heard'. In fact, this was the first of 3 questions. The second and 3rd questions were:
2)On how many occasions in the last 3 years has Chamber President Judge McKenna suffered an extraordinary memory lapse? I then go on to describe the way in her Ruling on my case of 20 Feb 2019 she falsely attributes an 'error in law' obligation (the omission of which is alleged to have invalidated my appeal)
to Registrar Rebecca Worth in her ruling on the same case on the 15 Feb 2019. The documents are, of course, available to GRC officers to check on.
3) How many times in the last 3 years has Chamber President Judge Alison McKenna failed to disclose a conflict of interest and recuse herself from hearing and ruling on a case that raises the same issues as a case she's heard shortly before?

[ GIVE DETAILS ABOUT YOUR COMPLAINT HERE] Not Complaint – a request for an Internal Review

I'm asking for an Internal Review of the GRC refusal to respond to my FOI Request. I’m very sorry GRC official/s appear to have misinterpreted my Request. I’d obviously hate to think my request had given offence but if it did so, one of the things I would ask an Internal Review to do is clarify for me the nature of your objections so that I could re-word my request in a way that was acceptable I fear, however, that my remarks have been misconstrued – but I don’t know exactly which remarks.

Perhaps I could take your 3 objections in turn and you could clarify how, unintentionally, I've upset you:

1) 'Abusive or aggressive language - the tone and language etc is unacceptable and it goes beyond the level of criticism that the GRC should expect to receive'.

I'm sorry, I wasn't aware of any offensive tone. As a former university English lecturer, I'm very aware that 'tone' is a somewhat elusive quality, something that's very difficult to pin down. Even so you find the 'tone' unacceptable and I wonder if you'd be so good as identify the particular phrases where you think the ‘tone’ is ‘abusive’ or ‘aggressive’. I was at pains to avoid any such perceived offensiveness. If I’m to avoid this in future Requests, I need you to identify precisely where I’m going wrong.

You also refer to ‘criticism’. Again, can you identify remarks that are critical? I had thought I was demonstrating concern for Ms McKenna’s health. It is a matter of public record that Judge McKenna had a ‘serious illness in 2016/2017. In the Senior President’s Annual Report 2017, GRC President Judge Peter Lane welcomed back Ms McKenna ‘after a long period of illness.’ If Chamber President Judge McKenna’s ‘extraordinary lapse of memory’ (I’m assuming that no-one objects to this description of the false attribution of the ‘error in law’ condition to Registrar Worth in McKenna’s 20 Feb. 2019 Ruling) could possibly be related to that long period of illness, then she may not even be aware of it and – as I pointed out – it may be in her own interest that she be given a leave of absence to consult with doctors etc. it hardly needs saying that it might also be in the public interest. No-one at the GRC would want her judgement of appellants being called into question.

I’d assumed the Annual Report I was quoting from would be familiar to the GRC official responding to my request. Evidently, I was wrong. If you can’t access a copy just contact me and I’ll send you one. Was I wrong to quote from a Report freely available to anyone online? Peter Lane was clearly content it should be freely available. Was he wrong?

It may be, however, that there’s no connection between this memory loss and Ms Mckenna’s ‘long period of illness’. That this memory lap was a ‘one-off’. This was what lay behind my question. Any perceived criticism by GRC officers was certainly not intended. If there’d been no other examples of memory loss in the last 3 years, what better way to re-assure the public. Is this what you meant by ‘level of criticism’?

Sadly, the best way to raise (as opposed to allay) suspicions that it wasn’t a one-off, is to evade the question. If this was an attempt to protect Chamber President Judge McKenna, it seems to me ill-conceived. It may well have had precisely the opposite effect. It’s the law of unintended consequences.

2) ‘Unfounded accusations – you have made unsubstantiated accusations against a specific employee’ by which you obviously mean Ms McKenna. This worried me even more. I apologise: I certainly wasn’t aware of making any allegations (or accusations) at all.

Once more I’d be grateful if you could identify these ‘allegations’ and ‘accusations’. What accusations? If you can enlighten me about these alleged accusations, I will immediately write to Ms McKenna to apologise. I’ve been through my Request with a fine toothcomb, and can’t find an allegation or accusation. I have simply stated facts – all of which are easily verifiable. Have you made any attempt to verify them? I still don’t see how stating a fact can be described as an ‘accusation’ or ‘allegation’.

‘Accusation’ is defined by the OED as ‘a charge or claim that someone has done something wrong or illegal.
However, I suppose there’s a possibility you are regarding my point 3 about Judge McKenna’s ‘failure to disclose a conflict of interest’ as an ‘allegation or accusation’. I contend this was a legitimate concern and I complained about it. But if you are going to define this complaint as an ‘accusation or allegation’ then they are certainly not unfounded – I have referred to the relevant documents in the Background section of my complaint; they are freely available but if you can’t access them, I can send you copies – I do wish to be helpful. But my concern about the judge’s failure to disclose a conflict of interest is a statement of fact – it is NOT UNFOUNDED – and I would ask you to retract that statement. If you refuse to do so, I will let the general public draw their own conclusions.

3) ‘Personal grudge’: please explain how asking for the number of times Judge McKenna has failed to disclose a conflict of interest – which the ‘reasonable observer’ of the Bangalore Principles might well feel is a matter of some concern - is evidence of a ‘personal grudge’. My concern is for Judge McKenna’s health, her state of mind. Surely this is something commendable, not something that could be construed as a ‘personal grudge’. I still feel it’s wrong, but surely you’re not going to interpret that as manifesting ‘personal enmity’?

These worries, these concerns could so easily have been resolved had you not misinterpreted them as personal attacks on Ms McKenna. Publish the information and this would immediately allay public anxieties and restore confidence, secure in the knowledge that these were simply ‘one-offs’ and that all is well with the Judge. My Requests had Ms McKenna’s best interests at heart. Your refusal to respond and your comments (which I find personally wounding) clearly indicate they’ve been misinterpreted. Once again, therefore, I would be grateful for clarity: what evidence are you providing of a ‘personal grudge’ against Judge McKenna?

Where’s the evidence for ‘personal enmity’? I presume it’s not because I made a complaint about Judge McKenna to the JCIO? If that is the ‘evidence’ then anyone making a complaint is regarded by you as motivated by ‘personal enmity’. My complaint was about failure to disclose a potential conflict of interest. This is something enshrined in the Bangalore Principles 2005. These Principles were accepted throughout the world and certainly in the UK and USA. The JCIO now feels that a conflict of interest is not something that’s worth investigating but the vast majority of people think the principle is an important one that should be adhered to. It remains, of course, a basic tenet of the Bangalore Principles.

Until some time in 2018, the JCIO said you could complain about a judge’s failure to disclose a potential conflict of interest (the JCIO is unable to provide a date, or an agenda item or minutes of the meeting) but then it was removed from the list of things you could complain about but not included in the massively expanded list of things you couldn’t complain about (from 8 to 18!) The things you could complain about was reduced from 6 to 4 and ‘criminal convictions’ which was formally on the list of things you could complain about was switched to the list of things you could not complain about. In fact, there were 2 lots of changes in 2018 but the JCIO’s record-keeping is such that they don’t know the date of either set of changes and don’t know which changes were made in which of the 2 meetings.

I find it curious that the Joint Heads of the JCIO saw fit not to make any mention of these hugely controversial changes in their Annual Report of 2018-19.

In any case, I now feel I was wrong to make a complaint about Chamber President Alison McKenna though not because the complaint was motivated by ‘personal enmity’. I think I was wrong because as a Christian, I feel I should have interpreted her behaviour in a more charitable way, taking into account that it might possibly belated to her serious illness.

Can I entreat whoever is conducting this Internal Review to provide far more clarity and specificity to their accusations. For example: what words or phrases are they interpreting as abusive and aggressive (I’ve searched but can’t find any). And what are the ‘unfounded accusations’ that I’m alleged to have made. I can’t find any accusations, only statements of fact which can be verified by examining the relevant documents (if you can’t access these just let me know & I’ll send you copies). And where are the passages that support your unfounded charge of ‘personal grudges’ and ‘personal enmity’ – I hope anyone making a complaint is not to be regarded as exercising a ‘personal grudge'.

Yours faithfully,

Dudley Jones

Gadawodd taryn taylor anodiad ()

Comments & excuses for NOT answering or being ACCOUNTABLE regarding FOI requests. Accusations made by various departments in order to avoid answers; Vexatious, abusive, aggressive, shouting, angry, tone, criticism, loud, etc etc..... in fact any descriptive adjective to be used as a rebuttal. Please note; capital letters are generally used to draw one's attention or to emphasise. In no way can the use of capital letters be misconstrued as swearing???!!!

SW Region Support, Gwasanaeth Llysoedd a Thribiwnlysoedd EM

1 Atodiad

Good afternoon,

 

Please see attached acknowledgement of your request.

 

Kind Regards

SW Data Protection Team
SW Regional Support Unit | HMCTS

Web: [1]www.gov.uk/hmcts

"I am not authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor to
make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of
Justice in any way via electronic means".

 

[2]Here is how HMCTS uses personal data about you.

 

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Gadawodd J Roberts anodiad ()

Here is an annotation I left on another thread which may interest you:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/a...

'UT decision delivers a bloodied nose to the FTT president. The FTT president erred in law by striking out the proceedings:

GIA/2422/2019 [2020] UKUT 93(AAC)

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk...

The Commissioner didn't fare any better:

“21. The Commissioner argued that the Chamber President had been entitled to make the decision she did. I do not accept that, for the reasons I have given.”

The Judge observed:

“14. Dr Kirkham cannot be blamed for taking up employment abroad. There is no suggestion that this was a tactic to delay the proceedings on the appeal. Courts and tribunals conduct hearings by telephone or video link and take account of time differences. Just off the top of my head, the Upper Tribunal has conducted hearings with parties in Switzerland, Malta and Canada.”

The appeal on the failure of the FTT President to recuse herself got nowhere (like most, I think).

The Judge cites Dobbs v Triodos Bank NV [2005] EWCA Civ 468 (para. 33) to indicate the high hurdle a litigant must jump if he is to succeed on recusal.

In para. 25 the Judge delivers some profound thoughts on the 'fair-minded and informed observer' who pops up often in the courts.

Here's another example where she popped up (para. 100):

[2019] EWHC 1561(Admin)

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admi... '