tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post8905753901927938145..comments2024-03-29T12:58:06.213+00:00Comments on The Justice Diaries: COURT FRACKING: Scottish Government ban on fracking does not exist says Lord Pentland - Court of Session throws out INEOS challenge as Judge says Ministerial claims “did not accurately express the legal effect of the decisions”Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-20207154179776232018-06-28T13:16:48.905+01:002018-06-28T13:16:48.905+01:00What is Gill up to now, fracking down south maybe?...What is Gill up to now, fracking down south maybe?<br />Fracking will end up taking place in Scotland but you can bet your last penny no fracking will take place under properties belonging to politicians lawyers police or judges but everyone else is fair game and if you dont agree with it the politicians lawyers police and judges will come along and take your property from you.<br /><br />btw nice to see you back writing.I havent bought papers since you had your break mainly because you are one of the very few journalists I trust in the whole of Scotland maybe even the entire country because at least you write it up properly.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-90479939234083730372018-06-20T21:04:26.857+01:002018-06-20T21:04:26.857+01:00So 'Nikkla' and her colleagues get it wron...So 'Nikkla' and her colleagues get it wrong....again......and the judiciary and legal profession can not wait to dip their snouts in the trough.<br /><br />Why am I not surprised.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-16990501481021978992018-06-20T19:07:44.269+01:002018-06-20T19:07:44.269+01:00@ 20 June 2018 at 01:39
Yes, and FM admitting any...@ 20 June 2018 at 01:39<br /><br />Yes, and FM admitting anything other than ordering a review or a delay with ultimately no action, does not happen in Scotland.<br /><br />@ 20 June 2018 at 18:06<br /><br />Yes, Lord Pentland's variable views on the effect of Ministerial statements must rank somewhere between a blep and a mlem ...<br /><br />Says a lot about the so-called 'independence' of the judiciary from the executive when a judge feels he has to deflect any notion of criticism of what is certainly a key factor in events re the non existent ban on fracking which led to a legal challenge because everyone claimed a ban existed when one clearly does not in any legislative terms ... and most probably if legislation was put through any resulting ban may be challenged and quite possibly be thrown out by a judiciary which has already stated members have vested interests in the fossil fuel sector.Diary of Injusticehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00697476580161690118noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-70609098105779737482018-06-20T18:06:43.027+01:002018-06-20T18:06:43.027+01:00Poor old Lord Pentland also forced to cow tow to t...Poor old Lord Pentland also forced to cow tow to the Sturgeon regime with his BS about the irrelevancy of ministerial statements to the legal case - when as you rightly draw to our attention these same statements (and their effects since) provoked this legal challenge.<br /><br />Quoting your fine article and btw welcome back!<br /><br />In his judgement published earlier today, Lord Pentland quoted First Minister Nicola Sturgeon and Mr Wheelhouse’s statements in parliament about there being a ban.<br /><br />However, in what seems an attempt at appeasing the misleading statements by Ministers, Lord Pentland was forced to add that the accuracy of such misleading ministerial statements was not the core issue – even though the existence of the misleading claims by the First Minister & Scotish Government led to the Ineos legal challenge in the first place.<br /><br />Lord Pentland said: “The legal question is not whether ministers have accurately described or commented on their understanding of the legal effect of the various steps they have taken or authorised to be taken under the planning system, but the fundamentally different question of what the legal effect of those steps really is.<br /><br />He added: “The ministerial comments reflecting the opinion that there was an effective ban on fracking are (a) irrelevant to the legal question before the court; (b) not binding on the court; (c) in any event, not determinative of the question of construction that the court has to address; and (d) to the extent that they did not accurately express the legal effect of the decisions taken must be left out of account when it comes to answering the legal question.”Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-42353665689607239992018-06-20T01:39:42.662+01:002018-06-20T01:39:42.662+01:00Paul Wheelhouse is so full of crap.
Why didnt Stur...Paul Wheelhouse is so full of crap.<br />Why didnt Sturgeon come out and admit they lied through their teeth about the ban like they lie on everything else going on in Scotland by their handAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com