Kaschke v Gray, hearing 18 May 2009

I well and truly lost this application for an injunction to force Mr Gray to take his blog off his site. Apparently his partial defence of justification and fair comment is enough for the court to stop any application for injunction despite my plea that Mr Gray never could proof his allegations. That even Der Spiegel took their original article off the Internet sale. Mr Justice Openshaw was surprised that Mr Gray’s blog is still up and remarked that Mr Gray should argue his point at trial, so his honour acknowledges that the case should go to trial and said that the longer the blog remains up the higher the damages are going to be.

Mr Justice Openshaw even said that the letter Mr Gray supplied for the hearing is suitable for a libel claim should Mr Gray publish it. Should anybody get to see a letter from Mr Gray dated 18 May 2009, addressed to Mr Justice Openshaw complete with Statement of Truth let me know, I shall sue Mr Gray on that letter.

Mr Gray put on his boyish grin and harmless coat and asked Mr Justice Openshaw whether he could kindly make an order to declare me a frivolous applicant so to stop me from making any further applications and Mr Justice Openshaw declined to consider it without a formal application.

I then said that constantly the court would take Mr Gray’s letters as applications and he never gets costs awarded against him when he loses but I get costs awarded against me. I have to pay Mr Gray £100, he wanted £200. I did protest why I should have to pay for the compilation of Mr Gray’s letter that is far away from the truth but signed with a statement of truth. I think the judge took that into account and also Mr Gray’s assurances that he had to take emergency leave but actually was due to address a union meeting today.

Mr Justice Openshaw remarked that Defamation is not a playground for personal litigants.

I shall pay Mr Gray’s costs, that means my little girl I look after can’t have her birthday party.  Mr Gray of course insists on his costs.

Mr Gray must be very happy considering he knows what being fined means as he had been fined by even opposing Union decisions in 2004. and Worker’s Liberty is fully behind him. Beware the Wolf in the Sheepskin, is all I can say to the not so charming Mr Gray. But the High Court seems to be the left-wing workers paradise.
Up-date 4.3.10 thanks be to god the high court has found against the unions in the case of the BA strikers last x-mas.

In the hearing on 15 May 2009 Mr Osler did not ask for costs on the injunction application but offered me an apology. Mr Gray was very happy to have gotten himself £100 despite his constant complaints how I am wasting the court’s time and money. I am sure that the court could have made an application to stop me from acting on their own behalf if they saw good reason to.

So far not one judge has said that my cases or applications are without merit.

I shall send Mr Gray a cheque, no doubt he will revel in his victory today and maybe tell his many friends. Mr Gray has even been mentioned in the Guardian. Just checking on Mr Gray’s popularity that explains the 77 thousand plus links back to his site, even Rupa Huq is one of his ardent fans. So Mr Gray won’t hardly be able to continue his argument that the page about me has had only 2 visitors, me and my legal representative.

In conclusion, I lost the hearing but not the case and Mr Justice Openshaw’s remarks were well worth the money.

But, talking of money, the court slowly but surely prices me out of the proceedings, fines for this, fines for that, costs and more costs and I have to constantly produce bundles and copy papers whilst I never get any costs awarded for me, even if the defendants loose one of their letter applications, if they make a mockery of court procedures its always costs in case and if I make a mistake I get big costs awarded against me. It becomes quite obvious because it happened only once that a defendant was fined a paltry sum in my favour and I have not even claimed that money.

I think it is wrong in principle that personal litigants are expected to do everything by the rules but some litigants get the rules imposed stricter than others. Lawyers always argue on costs and this case has now been going on for over 1 year and I don’t think I get a fair hearing within a reasonable time at all. It’s always what Mr Gray wants, Mr Gray gets and he doesn’t even have to apply for it formally, he just writes letters.

Today was the first time that a judge actually told Mr Gray that he will have to make a formal application if he wants to achieve something, and from interpreting the judge’s words Mr Gray’s application for dismissal of the case is going to go down the pan and I bet I won’t get costs again in my favour. I let you know how it goes.

The court seems to think that personal litigants as defendants are more deserving of the court’s sympathy than personal litigant claimants and Mr Gray’s acting is beyond belief. He is in fact a very savvy negotiator a professional in Union matters and very prominent at that, but he always begs the court for forgiveness about his status as not having legal representation, apologises for any mistakes he may make and expects me to pay for mine.

His laid back attitude is admirable but the reality of the situation is that Mr Gray puts on an act for the judges and if I were a judge I would see Mr Gray’s behaviour as a sheer insult, writing letters with unsubstantiated allegations, no backing up by any paperwork whatsoever, and the judges still award costs in his favour. I have yet to see a bundle compiled by Mr Gray or any other evidences apart from his long letters, again without evidences but swearing to be true. The man should be done for lying to the court, that should be against the law.

Comments are closed.

Blog Stats

  • 55,048 hits
%d bloggers like this: