In the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom
Kenyon
v
Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government
18th May 2021
This verdict below relates to the still ongoing vendetta that Mr Jim Kenyon – Chair, Independent Hemsworth Town Council, has with against Saul Construction Limited .
Funded with our money, whether it is by legal aid or precept charges to the land at Kirkby Road in Hemsworth where he is trying to prevent the site being developed for much needed housing.
Despite having lost both the original case and the appeal against that decision, in a very profound way which led the judge to use words such as “unduly forensic and nit picking” he has now lost a further appeal to the Supreme Court no less, with another very damming verdict, so as well as being labelled as “unduly forensic and nit picking”
We now have the honour of having a Chair of Council that tried to appeal to the Supreme Court but unfortunately did not raise an arguable point of law.
(To be fair this does sound like Kenyon who’s never let the truth get in the way of another lie so he is at least consistent)
Costs once again awarded against him, paid by someone else of course, oh that’s us again isn’t it?
Ferret wonders if the Councillors at HTC were made aware of this decision before they voted to continue the legal battle with Saul Construction due to be heard in March next year?
Part two to follow on Monday…
Jesus
Kenyon has taken a case to the Supreme Court with “no arguable point of law” this idiot is even dafter than we already knew. I bet he wouldn’t do it with his own money. Councillors Hirst and Mitchell and any other councillor having doubts about Kenyon, were you aware of this very important information? Although this case wasn’t brought by Hemsworth Town Council, it is very relevant as it shows the desperate lengths that Kenyon will go to in his ongoing vendetta and if the legal team is the same, the reliability of the advice being given to you, for our case next year. I also believe you need to establish why this decision was not disclosed to you if it was withheld. All relevant information should be provided to the councillors. At the end of the day you can be held personally and financially responsible for irrational decisions.
It’s so easy to waste other people’s money, a penny a bucketful as the saying goes but then again, is it wasted if it goes into other people’s pockets? Well I believe it’s not only wasted but darn right immoral. If it’s not dishonest it ought to be.
I don’t think you’re asking the right question here. Did the councillors know? Or should we be asking did they care? Of course we will never know which councillors voted for this as its in the exclusions but I could tell you the 5 who voted AGAINST. Sadly they are outnumbered
HTC extraordinary meeting next week on agenda to discuss sports complex (their words) “possible alternatives to dispute resolution re sports complex”. ETHELBERT ETHELBERT get me more meds
Legal aid should not be available for cases as ridiculous as this.
I hear Kenyon’s got a couple of script writers now as he was having trouble with his ABC’s, I noticed he was spelling Bodger with an A, and stringing a sentence of more than 3 words with more than two letters was a problem, so I hope the “crisp” man and the one with a “real” qualification fair better and don’t need an interpreter too often to decipher his rantings. They’ve got their work cut out trying to get him out of this one. Best laugh I’ve had in ages, makes my day, they ought to make a sit com out of his delusions of grandeur and call it …….. only a fool and donkeys!!!!
I can think of another few names to call this unqualified idiotic imbecile, the judge didn’t even go half way there. No wonder he kept this one quiet. Hard to believe with a mouth that size and a brain that small but seriously though who in their right mind would take a case to the supreme court with no arguable case, and what legal firm of advisors would want to put themselves in a position to be subjected to such an embarrasing decision. It’s looking very grim for the future of this community.
I would have thought that even though this is in the exclusion part of the meeting, minutes should be kept and distributed to all councillors. If they are not happy with the minutes recorded they then shouldn’t vote to approve and put in writing what needs amending so have a record for themselves. They should always do that in writing so they have a paper trail with a timeline. IMO
Just wondering whose fault it will be this time, not be the Bodger of course never is. You could try hiding in your sett in your new home to be, among the waste but oh that’s another lie isn’t it. I’m sure you’ll come up with something there’s nothing better than having a laugh at a liar that never realises he’s been rumbled.
Taking a case to one of the highest tribunals in the state not for the faint hearted or those with shallow pockets. That the judge dismissed it in such short shrift and his choice of few words is damning on both the appellant and his counsel. No self respecting counsel would advise taking a case with no identifiable point of law to advance at trial in essence they’re trying to convince an higher tribunals to re run the original case and this is clearly not the purpose of those courts hence the hesitance to use them without substantial clear grounds of appeal in other words the lower court erred in law in its decision. Both HTC and the precept payer are certainly not getting value for money.
Couldn’t agree more, the choice of legal representation by HTC is very questionable given this verdict and the previous ones related to this case. For HTC to employ the same legal firm seems a very irrational decision with regards to their success or should I say failure rate.
In the face of these rulings, how can a HTC put up an argument to support further action in crown court.
Not a crown court in the land would overule the supreme court and a judicial review. It’s bonkers.