Bassman62 Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 No, I mean you . The judge is in no doubt of his error.So he's told you that as well did he, my we are in such esteemed company, we now have someone who's used to being in the prescence of judges I reckon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted December 4, 2010 Author Share Posted December 4, 2010 I think scraping the barrel now comes to mind in your case danot. They probably spend more than £2m a year on their adverts. Who cares if they spend £20 million? The will was and is legally valid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 They also get it wrong from time to time.But you being well up on the law and in their confidence know for sure about this case. We're in the prescence of some mighty being here, Sheffields answer to the Attorney General. All post 3 we're not worthies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 Who cares if they spend £20 million? The will was and is legally valid.Of course it was deary now drink your Ovaltine time for beddy bys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted December 4, 2010 Author Share Posted December 4, 2010 So he's told you that as well did he, my we are in such esteemed company, we now have someone who's used to being in the prescence of judges I reckon.No he didn't tell me. It seems he's keeping the reason for his ruling to himself. Can you explain what his reason was? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frumius Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 Hi chaps. I read the early exchanges on this thread which were quite civil. Now you've defended to insulting each other. It's like the "discussions"my parents used to have.:hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 No he didn't tell me. It seems he's keeping the reason for his ruling to himself. Can you explain what his reason was?How do you know he's keeping the reasons to himself? were you there at his summing up? you seem to make a lot a rash statements. Ive asked you before have you read the transcript of the trial yes or no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted December 4, 2010 Author Share Posted December 4, 2010 But you being well up on the law and in their confidence know for sure about this case. We're in the prescence of some mighty being here, Sheffields answer to the Attorney General. All post 3 we're not worthies. It's nothing to do with being up on the law, the law pertaining to the validity of a will is common knowledge. Google it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 Hi chaps. I read the early exchanges on this thread which were quite civil. Now you've defended to insulting each other. It's like the "discussions"my parents used to have.:hihi:Wll he's been asked several times to substantiate his statements/comments about the trial judge etc, we're still waiting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 It's nothing to do with being up on the law, the law pertaining to the validity of a will is common knowledge. Google it! So are you saying that after an expensive trial the judge doesn't know the law? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.