Brighton Court tiptoes away from PM's breach of contract
Stuart Bower and supporters at Brighton
John Wallace reports on Stuart Bower's suit in Brighton County Court which claimed breach of contract against the Prime Minister for refusing a referendum on the EU's constitutional treaty. Our comments appear in italics.
The judge refused to hear the case based on these points -
a) A manifesto didn’t provide a “reasonable expectation” of what a government would actually do. Clearly this judge has a well-developed sense of irony.
b) Stuart Bower should have applied to the High Court since a County Court does not have the jurisdiction to hear such cases under section 42.1(B) of the County Court Regulations. Strange that no one at the court with a better grasp of section 42.1 (B) thought to mention this earlier. Nevertheless, the resulting publicity will prove better for Bower and the British people than for the court or the government.
c) The appeal which was lodged was refused on the grounds that the case had little chance of success in the higher court. A curious opinion. If the case has no standing in this court, why is the court ruling on the appeal? I should think (but I am an American) that Stuart Bower could take the case to the court where it belongs.
Supporting Stuart was James Fenton who has worked tirelessly and has done a great job representing him, and at no charge. Thank you Fenton, Bower, and Wallace.