RE:- Equal Treatment Bench Book February 2018 1) Section 11 of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 2) Section 119 of the Equality Act 2010 3) Schedule 1 Interpretation Act 1978

Ismail Abdulhai Bhamjee made this Rhyddid Gwybodaeth request to Civil Procedure Rule Committee

This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body. Contact us if you think it ought be re-opened.

Gwrthodwyd y cais gan Civil Procedure Rule Committee.

Ismail Abdulhai Bhamjee

Dear Civil Procedure Rule Committee,

I, Ismail Abdulhai Bhamjee do hereby make a complaint and request that:-

1) Do you have the Equal Treatment Bench Book February 2018.

2) Section 11 of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 and Statutory Instrument 1999 No 1125 has been mentioned in the Equal Treatment Bench Book.

3) How many decisions have been made under Section 119 of the Equality Act 2010 in the England and Wales.

4) Do you have the Schedule 1 Interpretation Act 1978 since the words, Writing, Printing can be by Email or Printing which can be a Very good Service by Email when serving a Claim Form or making a request to obtain copies of the Court Documents by Non-Parties

5. How many judgments have been given under Section 7 (5) (a) (b) of the Human Rights Act 1998 as you do have the decisions made in the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom O'Conner versus the Bar Standards Board.

6. You are aware that the Town and Country Planning Act 1971 has been repealed.

7. How many Wasted Costs Orders have been made in the Administrative Court under Section 51 (3) (6) (7) of the Senior Courts Act 1981, and also under Section 19, 19A, 19B of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985.

Yours faithfully,

Ismail Abdulhai Bhamjee

Wright, Jane, Civil Procedure Rule Committee

I am out of the office until  Tuesday 6 2018.    If your query is urgent
please email [email address]. 

 

Please note I do not work on Fridays. 

 

 

Thank you

 

Jane

 

 

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Ismail Abdulhai Bhamjee

Dear Civil Procedure Rule Committee,

I request your attention that you should kindly acknowledge my request as you must have returned for your Official Duty.

I also make a request that under the Tribunal Procedure Rules before the First tier Tribunal and the Upper Tribunal, Since Section 29 of the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 does allow for Costs against Legal Representative, but under the Tribunal Rules there is no Costs for Litigants in Persons which does amount to breach of the Human Rights Act 1998 and the Equality Act 2010 for direct and indirect Discrimination.

Yours faithfully,

Ismail Abdulhai Bhamjee

Wright, Jane, Civil Procedure Rule Committee

Dear Ismail Abdulhai Bhamjee
 
Thank you for your email dated 2nd March 2018.  I have forwarded your
request to the Ministry of Justice Data Access and Compliance Unit for a
response.   Please note you should send requests for information under the
FOI Act to the following address and not to me unless your query is
specifically in respect of the Civil Procedure Rule Committee.
 
Data Access and Compliance Unit
Postal Point 10.31, Floor 10
102 Petty France
London
SW1H 9AJ
 
[1]mailto:[email address]
 
Jane
 
 
Jane Wright
Secretary, Civil Procedure Rule Committee
Access to Justice
Phone: 020 3334 3184 Mobile:  077098 10099 
Address: Post Point 3.42, Ministry of Justice, 102 Petty France, London
SW1H 9AJ
Find out more on People Finder
Follow us on Twitter @MoJGovUK
 

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Wright, Jane, Civil Procedure Rule Committee

Dear Ismail Abdulhai Bhamjee

Thank you for your email. I have forwarded your email to colleagues in Tribunals Policy as your request did not seem to constitute a request under the FOI Act.

Jane

Jane Wright
Secretary, Civil Procedure Rule Committee
Access to Justice
Phone: 020 3334 3184 [mobile number]
Address: Post Point 3.42, Ministry of Justice, 102 Petty France, London SW1H 9AJ
Find out more on People Finder
Follow us on Twitter @MoJGovUK

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Ismail Abdulhai Bhamjee

Dear Wright, Jane,

I refer to your response and request that an Internal Review should be taken against your decision, since my request was a combined request which does fall under the Civil Procedure Rule Committee also:-

1. When the Civil Procedure Rule Committee had made recommendation for a Civil Proceedings Restraint Order in the year 2004, Section 11 of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 and Statutory Instrument 1999 No 1225 had been left out.

2. There are decisions given in the House of Lords and in the Court of Appeal where Costs Order can be made against non-parties and Legal Representatives, which does include the Solicitor and Barristers.

3. I did not take the Legal Proceedings against the Five Named Barristers David Forsdick, Rueben Taylor, David Elvin QC, James Mauruci, Robert Walton and the Treasury Solicitor, that they were instructed by me before, but they were misleading the Court and causing me unnecessary Expenses, since I was operating under the Statutory Instrument 1995 No 297 and Town and Country Planning [Use Classes] Order 1987 No 764 Class B8 STORAGE where the space did not exceed more than 235 Square Meter of Floor Space at the time. Land at 86-88 Upton Lane, Forest Gate, London E7 9 LW.

4. You have not confirmed that you have received a copy of the Court Order dated the 12th July 1988 before Her Hon Miss C. A. Calvert QC where I was given Leave of the Court to file a Petition for Foreign Decree (Talaq) in the Family Division High Court of Justice, whilst Negligence Proceedings are not commenced in the Family Division, they are commenced in any High Court of Justice Division, whilst Discrimination Claim are issued in the Judicial Review Proceedings.

5. There is Section 23 (g) Fraud or Mistake, 38 of the County Courts Act 1984, and Fresh Action can be taken against Judgment obtained by Fraud, as this is not mentioned in the Civil Procedure Rules.

6. The Taylor and Another Versus Lawrence Case which was decided in the Court of Appeal,
The CPR 52-17 which is now under the CPR 52-30 Rules.
The Word: County Court has been left out as the County Court can make any Order if it could be made by the High Court.

7. Judicial Discipline Rules, Since Case Management decisions and decisions made by Judges before 3rd April 2006 are not taken into consideration, as it is a Cover up.

Yours sincerely,

Ismail Abdulhai Bhamjee

Wright, Jane, Civil Procedure Rule Committee

Dear Mr Bhamjee

Your request which I have referred to colleagues in Tribunals policy is:

I also make a request that under the Tribunal Procedure Rules before the First tier Tribunal and the Upper Tribunal, Since Section 29 of the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 does allow for Costs against Legal Representative, but under the Tribunal Rules there is no Costs for Litigants in Persons which does amount to breach of the Human Rights Act 1998 and the Equality Act 2010 for direct and indirect Discrimination.

This does not fall within the remit of the Civil Procedure Rules and you will receive a response in due course. You cannot request an internal review of a response to an FOI request until you have received a response to that request.

Jane

Jane Wright
Secretary, Civil Procedure Rule Committee
Access to Justice
Phone: 020 3334 3184 [mobile number]
Address: Post Point 3.42, Ministry of Justice, 102 Petty France, London SW1H 9AJ
Find out more on People Finder
Follow us on Twitter @MoJGovUK

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Allman, Tony, Civil Procedure Rule Committee

1 Atodiad

 

Dear Mr Bhamjee

 

In response to your recent e-mail correspondence to Ms J Wright – I hereby
send you the following reply:

 

Please note: the References below to sections and subsections are to
provisions in the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 ("the 2007
Act").

 

 

Thank you for your e-mail addressed to Ms J Wright of 6^th March, I am
replying as I have responsibility for the Tribunal Procedure Rule
Committee Secretariat.

 

Your assertion that the 2007 Act and/or the Tribunal Procedure Rules ("the
Rules") are in breach of the Human Rights Act 1998 and/or unlawfully
discriminatory under the Equality Act 2010 is misconceived, as it appears
to be based on a misconception that the 2007 Act and the Rules do not
permit a costs order to be made in favour of a litigant in person.

 

Section 29(1) provides that the costs of and incidental to all proceedings
in the First-tier Tribunal and Upper Tribunal are in the discretion of the
Tribunal in which the proceedings take place ("the relevant Tribunal").
Section 29(2) provides that the relevant Tribunal shall have full power to
determine by whom and to what extent the costs are to be paid. Section
29(3) provides that subsections (1) and (2) have effect subject to
Tribunal Procedure Rules.

 

Section 29(4) grants the relevant Tribunal the power to order a legal or
other representative to pay the wasted costs incurred by a party as a
result of any improper, unreasonable or negligent act or omission on the
part of the representative or their employee(s) or which, in the light of
any such act or omission occurring after they were incurred, the relevant
Tribunal considers it is unreasonable to expect that party to pay. This
only affects whom an award can be made against, rather than in favour of.

 

There are 9 sets of Tribunal Procedure Rules:

Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Immigration and Asylum Chamber)
Rules 2014 (SI 2014/2604) Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax
Chamber) Rules 2009 (SI 2009/273) Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal)
(Health, Education and Social Care Chamber) Rules 2008 (SI 2008/2699)
Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Social Entitlement Chamber)
Rules 2008 (SI 2008/2685, "the Social Entitlement Rules") Tribunal
Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013 (SI
2013/1169) Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (War Pensions and
Armed Forces Compensation Chamber) Rules 2008 (SI 2008/2686, "the War
Pensions Rules") Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General
Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009 (SI 2009/1976) Tribunal Procedure (Upper
Tribunal) (Lands Chamber) Rules 2010 (SI 2010/2600) Tribunal Procedure
(Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008 (SI 2008/2698)

 

Each set of Rules imposes limits on the circumstances in which the
Tribunal can exercise its power to award costs. Two of them - namely the
War Pensions Rules and the Social Entitlement Rules - prohibit the making
of any costs order at all. None of the Rules governing the power to award
costs to a party differentiate between an award in favour of a party who
is legally represented and a party who is not (i.e. a litigant in person).

 

You have not identified the protected characteristic(s) in respect of
which unlawful discrimination is alleged. In any event, I do not see how
the provisions governing the power to award costs in that 2007 Act and/or
the Rules can be said to be discriminatory.

 

Additionally, you have not identified which right(s) under the Human
Rights Act 1998 you believe has been breached, nor have you specified the
basis for that belief. I do not accept that the 2007 Act and/or the Rules
breaches the Human Rights Act 1998. In particular, I do not believe that
Article 6 requires the existence of a full costs-shifting system for all
cases in the courts and tribunals system.

 

Yours sincerely

 

[1]Ministry of G A ALLMAN
Justice
Secretary to the Tribunal Procedure Committee and Senior
Policy Manager

Administrative Justice/Access to Justice

[mobile number]  Phone:0161 234 2070

1^st Floor Piccadilly Exchange

2 Piccadilly Plaza Manchester M1 4AH

Find out more on People Finder

Follow us on Twitter [2]@MoJGovUK

 

 

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Ismail Abdulhai Bhamjee

Dear Allman, Tony,

I thank you for your response and request for an Internal Review of your decision.

1) The Human Rights Act 1998, and Section 3 (7) (b) of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 is a Statute Law which can be relied upon by any person in any Part of the United Kingdom.

2) The Words: " Any other Enactment" This does means obviously any other Statutory Act or Statutory Instruments issued by any Minister of the Crown.

3) Obtaining Copies of the decisions before the First Tier Tribunal and the Upper Tribunal, When this is denied is also breach of the Public Justice. If any Person who wants to rely on the Tribunal decision or the Upper Tribunal Decisions, than He/She can rely on the decision if He/She wants to continue with the Appeal.

4) The First Tier Tribunal does not have the Jurisdiction Power to grant an Injunction Order, where this should be transferred to the Upper Tribunal.

5) Under the Case Law Precedents, It is not open for any Tribunal to ignore the decisions made in the House of Lords or the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. Whilst there is a legal Right to request for a Leap Frog Appeal from the Upper Tribunal direct to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom.

6) There is a legal right also to make an Application Claim for Judicial Review against the Public Authority directly instead of going to the Information Commissioner, the First Tier Tribunal any Chambers.

7) The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom has recently granted Permission to Appeal in the case of Samuel Versus Birmingham City Council against the Court of Appeal Judgment, Where we are being directly or Indirectly Discriminated by some of the Judges and Civil Servants in the United Kingdom, since the meaning of the word "Except" in English Law
This is mentioned under Schedule 1 of the Interpretation Act 1978.

8. There is a decision in the Court of Appeal Secretary of State for the Communities and Local Government versus another person that Lord Justice Collins did not have the Jurisdiction Power to give directions and orders on a Part 8 Claim Form.

Yours sincerely,

Ismail Abdulhai Bhamjee

Allman, Tony, Civil Procedure Rule Committee

Dear Mr Bhamjee

Thank you for your further e-mail.

There is no 'decision' to review and I regret that I do not understand the additional matters that you have cited.

My response to your original enquiry was cleared by Ministry legal colleagues and, should you wish to pursue this matter, may I respectfully suggest that you seek legal advice.

I am unable to assist you further.

Yours sincerely

G A ALLMAN

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Weston, Bob (Gloucester), Civil Procedure Rule Committee

1 Atodiad

Hello Mr Bhamjee,

Please find attached an acknowledgement of the above request.

 

Bob Weston

 

Knowledge Information Liaison Officer

 

HMCTS - Analysis and Performance Division, Finance, Governance and
Performance Directorate.

 

Tel: 01452 334448 or 0203 3345511

 

E [1][email address]

 

1st Floor | Twyver House | Bruton Way | Gloucester | GL1 1PE

 

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

 

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Weston, Bob (Gloucester), Civil Procedure Rule Committee

1 Atodiad

Please find attached a response to the above request.

 

Bob Weston

 

Knowledge Information Liaison Officer

 

HMCTS - Analysis and Performance Division, Finance, Governance and
Performance Directorate.

 

Tel: 01452 334448 or 0203 3345511

 

E [1][email address]

 

1st Floor | Twyver House | Bruton Way | Gloucester | GL1 1PE

 

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

 

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir