Captain Dart
Well-Known Member
Exactly, so if she fails on that then her reputation will be in tatters. So she will hang on like a bull mastiff to recover that money plus.
Exactly, so if she fails on that then her reputation will be in tatters. So she will hang on like a bull mastiff to recover that money plus.ARVO's different to the rest though.
ARVO plus 10% would be a massive result for Seppala I'd say... but that's rather different to the other investment.
Hmm, I disagree on that.Exactly, so if she fails on that then her reputation will be in tatters. So she will hang on like a bull mastiff to recover that money plus.
Has your keyboard lost the capital letters?sought (couldn't resist the urge to be pedantic :sorry
Exactly, so if she fails on that then her reputation will be in tatters. So she will hang on like a bull mastiff to recover that money plus.
But in the world of investing making money is king.Hmm, I disagree on that.
Depends how she fails.
If she fails without trying then yep, agreed.
If she shows some interesting strategies and still fails then nope, reputation still intact.
I still think the Northampton play would have actually helped her reputation in certain circles (not football ones!) more than it hindered. As an attempt to conjure something from nothing, it showed a certain ruthlessness and drive and imagination that would be appreciated by certain parties...
Personally think she was going to keep going with appeals until she gets what she wants. So the quickest way for it to end would be allow JR2 and get it over with.I really don't think she expected the opportunity to appeal as I said above and unfortunately I think you may be right. This lifeline will have given her/them new impetus.
I'm pretty much always wrong on these things but I really think we were close to the end of all this until this decision.
When it comes to him then yes I want to be pedantic.
You don't win "Brownie points" when picking people up on Grammar It makes you look more of a "Dickhead" Not everyone can spell, or pronounce correctly, but everyone has the inherent right to express their views and opinions on this, or any forum.
Picking up people on their grammar shouldn't happen. Some people have personal problems that make it difficult for them. And when they see it they can lose all confidence on posting.
He has to make one occasionallythat's actually a good point.
Picking up people on their grammar shouldn't happen. Some people have personal problems that make it difficult for them. And when they see it they can lose all confidence on posting.
I dunno either, but it might be a case of washing your hands with it. If someone doesn't like what you tell them, its probably easier to refer them to your boss to sort out. Pass the buck and let the boss tell them to piss off.I dunno.
I stand by the fact if a judge feels it's worth hearing then, well... it's worth hearing.
The main concern is, however, that they don't play all their cards in the first hearing to draw it out. You know how it was over so quickly, and they seemed so ludicrously underprepared? That doesn't sit right, really... as whatever else they may be, stupid isn't one of them.
/resists biting on obvious grammatical mistakeIt doesn't make me lose confidence. All it does is make me think that the person is a dick head, typically I already thought that they were anyway so all they're doing is reaffirming my conclusion about them. In that respect I can't loose
Don't resist, yield to your instincts, punish the perpetrator.:emoji_cop:/resists biting on obvious grammatical mistake
/resists biting on obvious grammatical mistake
There is a point where it has to be fresh evidence but I don't think we're at that part yet. Think at this stage its just another judge looking at it and deciding there's enough doubt it needs going over again.Wouldn't they need to present evidence to show why he was wrong though? Then we get to the appeal and it gets kicked straight out it just makes allowing the appeal pointless.
You don't win "Brownie points" when picking people up on Grammar It makes you look more of a "Dickhead" Not everyone can spell, or pronounce correctly, but everyone has the inherent right to express their views and opinions on this, or any forum.
There is a point where it has to be fresh evidence but I don't think we're at that part yet. Think at this stage its just another judge looking at it and deciding there's enough doubt it needs going over again.
Would love to know how they select judges for cases. The chap in the last round was a business partner of Cherie Blair which hardly seems the most neutral person to have when one side in the case is a Labour council!
So as well as saying Fernando, Grendel and Torchy are dickheads, you are clearly admitting you are one as well for picking Grendel up on his grammar.
He left years ago didn't he?Mark Labovich
You don't win "Brownie points" when picking people up on Grammar It makes you look more of a "Dickhead" Not everyone can spell, or pronounce correctly, but everyone has the inherent right to express their views and opinions on this, or any forum.
You don't need a capital G with "grammar".
He left years ago didn't he?
He left years ago didn't he?
Whereas you still need to be a "Dickhead"
Doesn't Labovich have shares in CCFC?
Calm down, you'll have a heart attack getting so worked up. I wasn't accusing your precious council of anything just a general question about how judges were chosen.Must of been how they won the right to appeal. The legal system is clearly in it with SISUUsing Dave's logic anyway.
Calm down, you'll have a heart attack getting so worked up. I wasn't accusing your precious council of anything just a general question about how judges were chosen.
I would have thought even the slightest suggestion that you might listen more favourably to one side rather than the other, whichever side that happened to be, would rule you out of presiding over a case.
Again, absolutely nothing like what I commented.Interesting that you think the British legal system is so corrupt though.
Small case d needed there.
So where does that put you then?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?