Berezovsky V Abramovich Verdict

Today Britain's High Court reached a verdict in a case in which Russian multi-millionaire Boris Berezovsky was suing Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich over a business deal that didn't go to Bereovsky's liking. The court ruled in Mr Ambramovich's favour. As Chelsea FC owner Abramovich is said to be a close personal friend of Russian President Vladmir Putin while Berezovsky is living as an exile in Britain after falling out with Putin the purpose of this long running case was to help fuel anti-Putin protests in Russia by showing that opponents of Putin have to go outside of Russia to seek justice in the Courts. By ruling in favour of Abramovich Britain was trying apologise to Russia over it's support for the anti-Putin protests which was done in no small part as a retaliation for Russia's opposition over Syria.

Underlining the fact that Britain is in no position to criticise Russia or anybody else over the issue of Judicial independence the Judge, Mrs Justice Gloster described Berezovsky as; "an unimpressive, and inherently unreliable, witness, who regarded truth as a transitory, flexible concept, which could be moulded to suit his current purposes." This is a reference to Britain's attempts to convince everyone that it's ruling in my grandmother's Court of Protection (COP) case is valid because I lack credibility as a witness. In itself it's debatable that I'm not a credible witness but that's never been an issue in the case because the documentary evidence submitted to the court could be put in front any person and provided they are given correct legal advice they will reach the same conclusions as me.

The first issue is whether or not my grandmother has been detained against her will (imprisoned). According to the precendent set in Campbell V Tormey 1969 as it relates to Ashworth she undisputibly has been and the International Criminal Court (ICC) considered a similar question in the trial of former Cote D' Ivorie President Laurent Gbagbo and came to the same conclusion.

The second issue is whether or not the correct procedure was followed to make that imprisonment lawful. According to the evidence submitted by Croydon University Hospital (CUH) by their lawyers (Capsticks) that correct procedure has most certainly not been followed and the majority of their submission was that they did not feel that the correct procedure was necessary. The problem with that is the principle of habeas corpus along with the European (EU) Convention on Human Rights means that imprisoning someone without the legal authority to do so is not something that is discretionary. Therefore through the evidence they submitted CUH have admitted to committing the criminal offence of unlawful imprisonment. The fact that a trained and qualified High Court Judge (Mrs Justice Hodge) has read through all this evidence and still ruled in favour of CUH is the basis for why that Judge must now be expelled from the Judiciary and prosecuted on a charge of perverting the course of justice.

So I suppose you could say that Britain's defence to the accusations of wrongdoing doesn't even get out of the starting block - much like TeamGB para-Olympic cyclist Jody Cundy who was disqualified from the men's C4 time trial follow a protest from Spain.

Britain reacted to this Spanish protest by announcing that they won't be re-grading GCSE exam results following the scandal that the grade boundaries being changed. This could be interpreted as Britain saying "We know the evidence proves we're wrong but we're going to push ahead regardless." In itself this was a bit of a distraction because Britain is entering into party political conference season and the issue of the re-drawing of electoral boundaries is a major point of contention between the Conservative Party and Liberal Democrat Party parts of the coalition. Therefore the argument about GCSE grade boundary changes is meant to look like a code for Britain's political classes to discuss the electoral boundary changes. The overlap with the US Presidential election and the arguments over voter ID laws is designed to convince people that they've cracked the false code by making them feel like they've just done something very clever.

16:30 on 31/8/12.