Saturday, 20 June 2009 00:00
Gordon Brown has admitted recent events have been among the worst in his political life and made him think he could "walk away from this tomorrow".
"I'm not interested in what accompanies being in power... and it would probably be good for my children," he told Saturday's Guardian newspaper.
But he insisted Labour could win the next election under his leadership.
In the wake of a failed bid to oust him the prime minister also said he may go into teaching after leaving office.
Mr Brown gave his interview to the Guardian after some of his own MPs and ministers attacked his leadership, and in the wake of Labour's poor performance in local and European elections.
He said the crises that had engulfed his leadership had hurt him and asked if he had ever been through something this bad before, he told the paper: "in my political life, not so much."
He added: "To be honest, you could walk away from all of this tomorrow." People know we've made these decisions to try to sort the economy out, but they don't yet see the results
Gordon Brown
During two interviews he gave the Guardian earlier this month, Mr Brown also said he wished he had imposed a tougher regulatory regime on the banking system, but said he "didn't want Britain to be outside the mainstream".
He also said he had been under heavy pressure to deregulate further, and acknowledged that he "didn't know a lot about" banks buying up sub-prime mortgages during his period as chancellor.
But, he added, the global nature of modern banking meant such behaviour would "continue to happen".
Mr Brown also insisted that Labour could win the next election under his leadership.
This, he said, was because the action the government had taken on the economy and MPs' expenses would start to bear fruit, and because the Tories had admitted they would cut public spending.
Promotion offer
He said: "People know we've made these decisions to try to sort the economy out, but they don't yet see the results. Same thing on MPs. You're in that period between the implementation of your policy and the delivery of it."
During his interview, Mr Brown also admitted to having a weakness in how he presented himself to the public.
"I'm not as great a presenter of information or communicator as I would like to be," he said.
He also said he offered Caroline Flint, the former Europe minister, a chance to attend every cabinet meeting, which she declined.
Ms Flint resigned earlier this month, saying that Mr Brown used women as "window dressing" and complaining that she was never invited to cabinet, but he says he offered her "a promotion, not a demotion".
'Political crisis'
Francis Beckett, who has written a biography of the prime minister, said Mr Brown is "thin skinned" and "does not have the hide of an elephant", unlike other politicians, which meant he was sensitive to personal slights.
The biographer said he believed Mr Brown was hoping that by being more candid, he would cultivate a "more human image", in contrast to the more "robotic" public persona which developed during his time as chancellor.
Labour MP Tony Wright told the BBC that Mr Brown had faced enormous problems during his time as prime minister.
He added: "He's the prime minister who is having to preside over the worst financial and economic crisis for 60 years, and the worst political crisis in modern times.
"Any prime minister presiding over that is going to take a battering. I would have thought the temptation to walk away would be great, but I've never seen Gordon as a walker-away."
Last Updated ( Saturday, 20 June 2009 18:36 )
|
Friday, 06 February 2009 14:30
(5) Court of Appeal decisions may be appealed to the House of Lords.
These basic routes of appeal also apply in relation to deputy judges and their equivalents, such as recorders sitting as county court circuit judges. Appeals from county court district judges (category (a) above) are the simplest administratively, with the claim remaining within the same court for the appeal, and simply being listed for the appeal before the judge. Appeals to High Court judges (categories (b) and (c)) may involve the appeal being heard in a new court. The Court of Appeal is located at the Royal Courts of Justice and its administrative office is known as the Civil Appeals Office.
Last Updated ( Wednesday, 17 June 2009 18:12 )
Friday, 06 February 2009 14:29
It is common knowledge that civil litigation is expensive. This is coupled with the rule that, in most cases, the losing party in litigation should pay the legal costs of the successful party.
The main reason for the rule is that the law seeks to ensure that a party required to prove their rights or innocence (whether it is the claimant or defendant) through the courts should be given a complete return of their costs incurred to date.
N.B However, a proviso to this rule is that a claimant who is awarded damages but not costs does not get a full remedy as to costs. Equally neither does a defendant who successfully defeats a claim but has to pay the solicitors who have achieved that defeat.
Litigation takes time, both for the investigative stages before proceedings are issued, and after issue through to final resolution. Solicitors acting for a party are entitled to seek payment on account as the claim progresses, and are not required to wait until the conclusion of the case before asking for payment. This is kept in the firm's client account. A client making payments on account is also not so likely to be taken by surprise by the issuing of interim bills.
An important consideration for many clients is whether their solicitors will take a case through to trial without demanding large sums of money or incurring additional fees such as barristers' cost. Lawdit Solicitors are different. Two members of its litigation department are Solicitor-Advocates. Both are solicitors who are qualified to represent clients as an advocate (like a barrister) in the higher courts in England and Wales. This means that you do not have to pay additional fees for legal representation at court/trial etc. This can save you thousands in the long run if your potential claim does go all the way to trial. This is not to say that we do not instruct Barristers on your behalf, of course we do. But only if it is necessary.
Last Updated ( Friday, 06 February 2009 14:30 )
|
Friday, 06 February 2009 14:28
Generally, the question of who pays for the costs of a claim is not determined until the claim is finally disposed of, whether by consent, interim process or trial. This is because the usual rule is that the successful party recovers costs from the loser and the outcome on the merits is only known when judgment is obtained. It is for this reason that the parties are not generally allowed to anticipate the eventual costs order by asking for interim orders that their opponents provide funds as security to pay for the costs of the action. Despite this, it is accepted that there have to be exceptions for cases where there is a significant risk of defendants suffering the injustice of having to defend proceedings with no real prospect of being able to recover costs if they are ultimately successful.
An order for security for costs can only be made: (a) before judgment, or (b) for the costs of an appellant, or of a respondent to an appeal who also appeals. Once security is given it may be retained, subject to the court’s discretion, pending an appeal. An order for security for costs usually requires the claimant to pay money into court as security for the payment of any costs order that may eventually be made in favour of the defendant, and staying the claim until the security is provided. On the application three matters arise:
(a) whether there are grounds for ordering security for costs;
(b) if so, whether the court's discretion should be exercised in favour of making the order; and
(c) if so, how much security should be provided.
Each of these three matters will be considered after first looking at the procedure for making the application and the capacity of the respondent to the application.
Friday, 06 February 2009 14:28
The principal remedies which are available in civil proceedings generally are examined in this chapter, consisting of legal remedies (debt and damages), which are available as of right on proof of infringement of the claimant's legal rights, and equitable remedies (injunction, specific performance, rectification and account), which the court may award, at its discretion, when a legal remedy would be inadequate or unavailable.
The discretion to award equitable remedies is exercised in accordance with established principles. In particular, an equitable remedy will not be awarded where it would be inequitable to do so, for example, in the light of the claimant's previous bad behaviour in relation to the subject matter of the claim (the rule that the claimant must come to the court with clean hands), or where the claimant has delayed in claiming the remedy, to the defendant's detriment
|
|
|
|
|
|
