Brixton Liveable Neighbourhood and LTN schemes - improvements for pedestrians and cyclists
- Thread starter teuchter
- Start date
Deleted - liquidindian got there first.
cuppa tee
Well-Known Member
That was me,I think I said aggressive and unreasonable and I said it was a possibility not a certainty...
Last edited:
beesonthewhatnow
going deaf for a living
Oh dear, how sad, etc etc.
sleaterkinney
Well-Known Member
They also employed a QC and had 35k behind them.
thebackrow
Considerably more Brixton.
also "we are in talks with our legal team about an appeal"
Where was the post where chowce5382 said they'd accept the courts judgement? (Also that one lambeth account he claims to have nothing to do with talking about 'we' again....)
Interestingly the judge clearly says that he would NOT have quashed the ETOs even if he had found Lambeth had breached equality duties. It will be interesting to see whether 1L supporters will throw more money at this when it's clear that there is no way this legal route is going to lead to the LTNs being removed:
Last edited:
chowce5382 - you may need to up date the fundraiser as you've met their target now and with the court case result it's unsure what any money now donated will be for: OneLambeth LTN Legal Challenge, organized by One Lambeth
thebackrow
Considerably more Brixton.
I think we can add "we want a legal opinion / not that legal opinion" to "we want data / not that data" and "we want a mayoral election / not that result"
sleaterkinney
Well-Known Member
Maybe the reason they didn't go into the arguments on here was because they were so thin, arguing that it wasn't an experiment?
snowy_again
Slush
Going back to @newbie’s comments that it was irresponsible to let more cyclists on the streets, bigger analysis of the road safety stats has been done - which proves just the opposite.
“The fatality data does show a huge 40% increase in cyclist deaths. Over a third of these happened in the ‘lockdown months’ of April – June when we saw the biggest rise in cycling, which was associated with quieter roads and largely fair weather. When the 45.7% increase in cycling is taken into consideration however this means that ‘cycling became 14% safer’.”
Comprehensive KSI analysis (of all forms of transport) here:
agilysis.co.uk
And the National Statistics updated data: Reported road casualties in Great Britain, provisional estimates: year ending June 2020
With more pedestrian and cycling analysis on September.
Turns out that older people may be dying more in car crashes as they weren’t used to driving after a period of absence.
“The fatality data does show a huge 40% increase in cyclist deaths. Over a third of these happened in the ‘lockdown months’ of April – June when we saw the biggest rise in cycling, which was associated with quieter roads and largely fair weather. When the 45.7% increase in cycling is taken into consideration however this means that ‘cycling became 14% safer’.”
Comprehensive KSI analysis (of all forms of transport) here:
Record low road deaths but did our roads actually become more dangerous? | Agilysis
The provisional 2020 Great Britain casualty data has been released by the DfT and shows a record low number of road deaths but the story behind these results requires a little further investigation.
agilysis.co.uk
And the National Statistics updated data: Reported road casualties in Great Britain, provisional estimates: year ending June 2020
With more pedestrian and cycling analysis on September.
Turns out that older people may be dying more in car crashes as they weren’t used to driving after a period of absence.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Here is the CV of the lawyer who its said here just wants to make money out of this.
rookirwinsweeney.co.uk
She seems to me to be one of those in the legal profession who try to use their skills to take up social issues.
Anne-Marie Irwin | Rook Irwin Sweeney - Public Law. Human Rights.
rookirwinsweeney.co.uk
She seems to me to be one of those in the legal profession who try to use their skills to take up social issues.
Winot
I wholeheartedley agree with your viewpoint
Any idea if the quoting of Kerr J is accurate? I couldn’t see any discussion of appeal in the judgement.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Here is what Sofia says, the disabled lady who took the case. She says she is unwell. I hope the strain of taking on Lambeth isn't taking to much of a toll on her.
Looks like she and her legal team are looking at appealing
Can't get link to work. Its on public view on Sofia FB.
Looks like she and her legal team are looking at appealing
Can't get link to work. Its on public view on Sofia FB.
Last edited:
snowy_again
Slush
Standard text isn’t it? Section 190:
- For those reasons, I grant permission to bring the judicial review claim but dismiss that claim; and I dismiss the claim brought under Part 8 of the CPR for statutory review.
I think Ed said law firm rather than making it personal. My experience of barristers is that they do cases on both sides of the divide.Here is the CV of the lawyer who its said here just wants to make money out of this.
Anne-Marie Irwin | Rook Irwin Sweeney - Public Law. Human Rights.
She seems to me to be one of those in the legal profession who try to use their skills to take up social issues.
liquidindian
Hello
Ah, sorry, if you're taking money that's been pooled together by a bunch of people (what is tax but mandatory crowdfunding?) then that's a bad thing. Just ask the mysterious person running the OLJ twitter account.
sleaterkinney
Well-Known Member
Sounds like they didn't lose after all, read the embedded letter.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
The poster quoted a specific person after saying this. Which is why I looked them up.
So instead your saying its the law firm she works for who are just trying to make money out of this?
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
So your saying she is corrupt.
Nope, I’m just posting that he said law firm not person
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Then put a quote from a specific person.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
So you don't agree with the original post. I'm a bit lost here with what you are getting at.
1. Edcraw said that the law firm were trying to make more money
2. You ran with that and tried to insinuate that he was talking about the individual barrister named in his quote
3. I challenged your interpretation of that
4. You then accused me that I believed the law firm were trying to make more money out of the case
All of which are classic deflection techniques.
To be clear, I’m pleased that the law has been upheld. I hope that more money is not spent on legal matters that could be spent on our communities
liquidindian
Hello
No, I didn't set this standard. I think she's a person being paid to do a job, like the guy doing the same for the council.
Similar threads
