Corruption in Court System

CORRUPTION IN COURT SYSTEM

CORRUPTION IN COURT SYSTEM FROM TOP TO BOTTOM IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER [Philip.jones88@btinternet.com]

The main situation explained in leaflet handed out outside the corrupt Bristol county court.

LEAFLET

YOUR ENTERING JUDGEDENYER CORRUPT COURT REMOVING DOCUMENTS FROM FILE ALL TAKEN BY HAND STAMPED BY THE COURT TO PERVERT THE COURSE OF JUSTICE. DENYER IGNORING REQUEST FOR COURT ORDERS [CALL FROM COURT DENYER OUT TO GET YOU BINNING DOCUMENTS.] ASK FOR ORAL HEARING IGNORED HIGHER ADMINISTRATION COURT ORDER ME X2 TO ASK DENYER AGAIN WHERE AS CORRUPT IGNORES . TO SAVE TIME MASTER PRODUCED CLAIMS TO ROYAL MAIL USED AS POSSIBLE COURT CLAIM UNCHANGED WHICH CAN AMENDED eg MAJORITY UNCHANGED ONLY NEW DATES SO TODAY ON THE 10.2.2012 I SENT A 1950 CUP,,,,TO ALDRIDGES,,,,AND UNCHANGED CLAIM UNDER REGULATIONS 7.4. COURT STATES IN PAPERS NOT A CLEAR STATEMENT OF FACT ONLY CHANGE FROM PREVIOUS CLAIM IS NEW DATE OF LOSS ECT. AT HEARING AN ABUSE OF PROCESS CORRUPT DJBRITTAN STATES WILL NOT LOOK AT OR CONSIDER ABUSE OF PROCESS AND STATES CLAIM WAS UNCLEAR IN N460 SHOULD BE MADE ONTHE,,,HE SENT ,,,,TO,,,,OF,,,AND REGULATIONS CLAIMING UNDER [IDENTICAL TO CLAIM ] RM IMMUNE FROM PROCEEDINGS . IN FILE NEVER ISSUE RAISED AT HEARING RM FROM 2003 STATE I COULD RECOVER IN PROCEEDINGS. DENYER KNOWS FROM ABOVE BRITTAN IS CORRUPT /WRONG ALL REQUESTS FOR ORAL HEARING IGNORED /BINNED WWW.CORRUPTIONINCOURTSYSTEM.COM

CLAIM V NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST

WWW.NORTHBRISTOLNHSTRUSTPUBLICCONCERNS.COM [LAWYER STATE I HAVE CLAIM]TRUST REPORT NONSENSE FROM OWN DOCUMENTS/RECORDINGS. CORRUPT DENYER ISSUES ORDER I MUST ASK HIM TO ISSUE PROCEEDINGS WHERE HE NOW AGAIN IGNORES APPLICATION TO PERVERT THE COURSE OF JUSTICE UTTERLY CORRUPT. AS ABOVE , SOLUTION ARBITRATION HOWEVER CORRUPT TRUST LAWYER SMITH AND STONER NHSLA REFUSE HIDING BEHIND ABOVE , CORRUPT DENYER IGNORES APPLICATION LEAVING ME DISABLED.

OVERLAP OF

WWW.CORRUPTIONINCOURTSYSTEM.COM

AND

WWW.NORTHBRISOLNHSTRUSTPUBLICCONCERNS.COM

Enclosed is actual documents just a selection to show issues, in these pages in brown are documents enclosed for your inspection, which will put in context sites, reason for picket at corrupt court. The appaling clinical practice at hospital trust, another issue in main part of document.

BS315289 [2003] Scan 10169 we have proof of posting, scan 10014 and in defence filed it states i can recover loss in court proceedings. At hearing Royal Mail lawyer confirms allowed to use proceedings to recover loss. Sending about 100 packets/week. We have had 7 claims later, the issue of if I could use proceedings to recover loss over lost mail never raised at any hearing due to above. . .

Stuart v Goldberg [2008] EWCA Civ 1,,,,,The raising of a defence in later proceedings may without more account for abuse if court satisfied the defence could have been raised in court in previous proceedings,,,,,,,,,,,

BS08441 Court refuses [ reference claim 3 ] to give me a defence.Please note documents BCC1 /HEARING OF 0BS08441 and hearing of OBS08441. As i state no defence, I ALREADY HAVE SELECTED FILE ,eg 2003 documents in court file is this issue to be raised at hearing, eg I could not issue proceedings. . . We know at least 4 documents corrupt court removed from file,,,,,DJWatson,,,,,something very very odd here. Read transcript. One was court order to supply defendants references numbers, taken by hand , my copy stamped/dated by the court. There was no reason i had document at trial, could have been therefore struck out as alledged i ignored court order, and later in appeal where court has my copy stamped/dated by the court HHJDenyer to conclude to corrupt /frustrate judicial process would ignore application for oral hearing.

2YJO3757 RELITAGATING 0BS08441 please see scan 10011 sent with claim form to Royal Mail. Please see document NOTES FOR HEARING 28 prepared for pig circus hearing. Royal Mail say writing difficult to read, so produce document Royal Mail Master to go with claim form, eg just need to add,,,,,,name/article lost on master for any new claim. . Please see royal mail master,ACTUAL claim, scans 10011 10039 10085. 10086. This is identical claim,claim 3 of OBS08441.Please see notes for hearing, skeletal argument for hearing, evidence showed same claim. . From master/claim,,,on the,,,,,,,,,,,i sent,,,,,,,,,,,,to,,,,,,,,,,,of,,,,,,,,,,,,and claiming under regulations 7.4. We have DJBrittan going to any length to corrupt/frustrate the judicial process, eg i had a barristers internet site print out in bundle, on abuse of process ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,you should not be vexed a second time over same facts, where he states ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,i have asked him twice ,he states no, he has not full tranccript of court of appeal hearing cited, i will therefore ignore evidence. He then produces the N460 ,scan 10298 which is utter nonsense from POC above, eg typed copy of claim form part of POC [particulars of claim] . The issue of defendants immune from proceedings never raised at hearing, he had judged case before hearing, Sharing v Preston CC [2012] , As barrister stated he feels fit to insult you throughout hearing, keeps immunity item up his sleeve , never presents issue at hearing. He covers himself,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,may be in file, however not prepared to trawl through file, if he made allegation could have indicated 2003/4 correspondence in that file, as was in also OBS08441 court file. .

In defence filed states we want to raise issue over terms of regulations. As barrister stated, did they want to say,,,,,,,,,,this is last time we will allow concession over our regulations, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,or they could have written before you issued proceedings that concession s89,,,,,,,,,,we have discretion over regulations, ,,,,,saying ,,,,,from 2003 you could use the courts for your loss, however from todays date this concession is drawn,,,,,,,,,,,,We do not know what they wanted to raise, and by DJBrittans definition at hearing he was acting as an advocate for Royal Mail, eg,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,he stated acting as advocate if I trawled through papers, and PRESENTED case for one side. Issue never raised at hearing, bias hearing, trawled through papers and presented case for them, if raised would have pointed to 2003 paper work in file, and Stuart case. WE WILL NEVER KNOW WHAT THEY WANTED TO RAISE AS BRITTAN JUDGED CASE BEFORE HEARING

He also states i insult the court, nonsense GET READ THE TRANSCRIPT OF OBS08441WHERE DJWATSON STATES YOU HAVE NO DEFENCE DO YOU REALLY WANT TO COME BACK AFTER YOU GET A DEFENCE. WERE DOCUMENTS REMOVED BY COURT FROM FILE .THIS IS UTTERLY UNFAIR AGAINST THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT FOR CORRUPT COURT . NOT TO GIVE ME A DEFENSE. So we ask for oral hearing, in all cases N244 FORM/fees application/ect sent. scan 10045 to 10050 Denyer ignores, . Lawyers advise making application for judicial review,[PART DOCUMENT] court orders scan 10063 to ask Denyer again, taken by hand my copy stamped/dated by the court, 1.2.2013, contacted the Bristol court told case closed Denyer will not answer, record conversation with court lawyer in Cardiff, told to ask again, please see stamped/dated by the court 18.2.2013 document scan10299. Told orally again you will not get a reply, Denyer will ignore application. Not told of judicial review hearing, lawyers Ashfords on file, so application to Court of Appeal. Denyer knows Brittan was wrong, so tactics to corrupt/frustrate the judicial process i will ignore applications.

In the meantime make new claim to Royal Mail, scan 10163 , paid return of post, told head of legal services has gone, we want to turn over a new page, forget award to us. No problems now with claims to Royal Mail. The court produces bundle for hearng Ms Jones [COURT OF APPEAL] asks what other documents for bundle, these labelled a, b. c..............as you can see the request for oral hearing to Denyer scan r to v, which is document above, also enclosed were other 2 applications for oral hearing, scans 10299, etc.

We had call do not approve of some of your applications to my court but will not stand by while corruption is going on Denyers out to get you,one of your applications for a oral hearing the court has forgotten to remove, in later recorded conversation at court with Mr Blair, IT IS ON COMPUTER SYSTEM. So no doubt i asked for oral hearing,which Denyer ignored, ALSO confirmed from enclosures in this site, but Mr Blair confirms on system, therefore Denyer ignored to corrupt/frustrate the judicial process. the court of appeal as also, in bundle request, however we have corrupt court judgement scan 10252. You can see how court will argue, via Strickson v Preston CC [2007] your asking for a judicial review, under frustration of the judicial process, however we have no frustration, you never asked for a hearing, where documents before the court above showed i had asked, Denyer ignores or bins. There was frustration of the judicial process, as Denyer /court binning applications, TO PERVERT COURSE OF JUSTICE AS THEY DID IN OBS08441., you will see corrupt practice still occuring below case v hospital trust. As the Admin. court states in order I am allowed to request a oral hearing, however we know made, accepted by Bristol court as made, however Denyer frustrates the judicial process by ignoring applications. HE IS DOING SAME PRACTICE IN CLAIM V NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST

We have claim v NORTHBRISTOL NHSTRUST. They refused to supply medical records so proceedings issue, trust lawyer Ms Smith in malicious way goes whining to the court misleading it, as i issued proceedings, stating Ms Needs was on holiday, did not see email, when you asked for medical records again, and therefore you issued proceedings. please see email Ms Smith was misleading the court. Eg scan 10303 , she was at work and saw email. New claim for travel expenses and to add a statement to medical records. Please see scan 10065 where trust must allow me to add statement, and refusal to pay travel expensive is no more than Ms Smith stealing my money. Ask to amend claim, court AGAIN ignores then strikes out. So ask Ms Smith to pay travel expenses and let me add statement, see scan 10306 , hiding behind court order, she refuses please see scan 10305. She is stealing my money, without tickets i can not be paid, and unamgigious she must allow me to add a statement. Months later she asks to settle although scan 10065 sent 30 times to trust and incerts statement in my medical records,money paid, we may ask why not done a year ago when i requested, she knew she must allow. .

Denyer then issues order i must ask him before i can issue any proceedings, he quotes case V Compuwave, where matter settled, they admit work not fit for purpose, in front of court is Tomlin order, where to conclude DJWatson required to know solely who was person who signed settlement order for defendants. Further Denyer quotes case v hospital trust, eg appeal against DJWatsons order as medical records were still outstanding. We had recordings with trust departments, that still medical records outstanding, and in settlement produced by trust, they confirm medical records were outstanding, as these now supplied,eg i had every right to appeal, this order of Denyer utterly without merit, just corrupt and vindictive asking me to contact him before any proceedings issued. WE THEN MAKE APPLICATION TO HIM WHERE AGAIN HE BINS PLEASE SEE BELOW. UTTERLY CORRUPT

We have negligence claim, against trust, lawyers state we will not take on due to quantum, we have Burroughs Day saying, have a claim, eg consider one aspect,,,,,surgeon wanted urgent physiotherapy in 2 months, believed too late, , trust admit refused to do, as trivial,in 2 months, contact consultant after 1 month, ignores correspondence, so had to pay myself. In recording after 2 months surgeon states too late, not required now should have been done earlier by trust. So we ask Denyer permission to issue proceedings, we know Denyer he would ignore againapplication, as previous tactics. See email scan 10301 W e knew trust would not disappoint with nonsense report, eg your fault disabled, you were offered physiotherapy AFTER 3 months, HOWEVER surgeon in recording states not required, SO TRUST ARE OFFEREING TO DO WORK THAT WILL NOT WORK NOT SURPRISING LOSING A MILLION POUNDS PER WEEK. Further state you did not turn up for appointments, where TRUST MS NEEDS ISSUES APOLOGY AS THESE SENT AS I REQUESTED NEW SURGICAL TEAM.SHE IS AWARE I WAS NOT COMING AND ISSUES APOLOGY AS LETTERS SENT

From regulations NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS trust lawyer Smith must send Protocol documents as acting in person, asap, over 6 months before sent, already at previous hearing she was misleading the court, if claim rejected, government instructions ,,,,,go to arbitration, where from scan 10301 email she refuses to go to arbitration, as also Denyer corrupt , can not take to the courts, leaving me disabled.,Denyer ignores/bins applications. She will not go for arbitration and Denyer as he has done for years, ignores application . On the 9.5.2016 this utter corrupt court , after nearly 3 months asks for reference number, all I can do is refer them to INITIAL court application to them 26.2.2016 as I now picket the court. Did Smith contact saying he will be picketing you, answer application. As barrister said why have they waited over 2 months, this court utterly corrupt, assume trust contacted court. This was a urgent application, compare with trust application, urgent, reply in 24 hours, this corrupt court knows urgent, however takes over 2 months to reply, and ignores PREVIOUS EMAILS WHERE REFERENCE NUMBER GIVEN. On the 10.5.2016 scan sent 10304, we await if any reply. Ms Smith in corrupt way working with Stoner state you can only contact once a month, we will not go to arbitration,in a few weeks will be out of time,to issue proceedings, as Denyer knows as not replying . WHOSE FAULT SO MUCH CORRESPONDENCE FROM ABOVE SMITH KNOWS SHE MUST ALLOW ME TO ADD STATEMENT THE NHS DOCUMENT SENT 30 TIMES BEFORE SHE LETS ME ADD STATEMENT, WE HAVE REPEAT,,,,, 8 TIMES SAME DOCUMENT SENT STILL WAITING FOR HER TO PUT NEW STATEMENT IN MEDICAL RECORDS.

With reference to scan 10304 we have no reply, so DENYER REFUSING TO ANSWER REQUEST TO ISSUE PROCEEDINGS. He is so corrupt, stops me issuing proceedings, unless I ask him, then ignores/bins application.

INTRODUCTION We had call courts out to get you, calls from trust, go and kill yourself,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,the staff at trust utter scum, ,court , they are binning applications you make for court orders, or ignoring. These taken by hand my copies stamped by the court, told HHJDenyer made a mistake one asking for oral hearing he has forgotten to remove, in recording with Mr Blair at court yes, on system, therefore true. In Higher court judgements,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,no evidence he asked for oral hearing to correct, where my copies stamped/dated by the court before Denyer removed from file. This has been going on for many years, DJWatson ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,something very very odd here,,,,,where as i give evidence, my copies stamped by court, removed from file. , now dealing with another corrupt organisation, a hospital trust, who in report states utter nonsense from own records, eg never asked for new surgical team,.. Ask for permission to issue proceedings against trust, where in usual way, Denyer bins. There are important overlap between both sites www.corruptionincourtsystem.com www.northbristolnhstrustpublicconcerns.com Today both sites will be amended,final alteration , 14.4.2016 , North Bristol NHS Trust/NHSLA have until 18.4.2016 to reply we know as corrupt we will not get a reply.

We have corrupt trust lawyer happy to mislead the court, , not pay travel expenses , hide behind court order not to allow me to add statement as NHS regulations, to medical records,. We have HHJDenyer court removing document to pervert course of justice, from my file, where overwhelming evidence against defendants, use tactics we will ignore application. Any length to pervert the course of justice.

Further HHJDenyer defined in text as we conclude in introduction is not honorable, .From call we had proved correct ,,,,HHJDenyer has been out to get you for sometime, by removing evidence, or if evidence overwhelming just will not answer applications for court orders. . Evidence in both websites, these are bullet points . Of utter relevance is historic application for judicial review , rejected in papers where Bristol county court awarded 500.00, asked for oral hearing.At hearing Bristol hearing before appeal, heard by DDJGisby , asked for notes, where he states,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,on reflection something very odd with this case. Can I quote from Lord Goldrings judgement. Although getting judgement badly wrong, not a reason to grant you a judicial review, Srickson v Preston CC [2007] EWHC1132 , further why can Bristol CC not issue proper paperwork, utterly legally flawed hearing appeal without transcript, and the award of 500.00 to the court would be quashed. NEVER FORGIVEN BY THE BRISTOL COURT FOR JUDGEMENT

BS315289 Royal Mail agree i can use proceedings for compensation for lost mail ,for this claim or further claims if they arise. in defence filed and confirmed in correspondence . Issue raised at hearing by DJStewart Brown, where they state we have agreed he can use proceedings, today or future claims. . Later claims of course issue never raised

OBS08441 This claim in 3 parts, one recorded delivery to Bristol County Court, and 2 others where Royal Mail appeal department said should be paid. It appears at hearing claims 1 and 2 put down for payment, so only issue 3. This arose as I obtain royal mail proof of posting as claim made, however claim lost, they state need recorded delivery slip, will NOT accept photocopy now f,,,,,,,,,off. Further they ask for court order for reference numbers of 3 claims, taken by hand my copy stamped by the court. I have no defence to claim 3 as initially lost in the post, RM now have, filed in wrong place. Ask several times for court order for Royal Mail to supply a defence, APPLICATIONS IGNORED. Ask final time a few days before hearing , where Mr Blair states,,,,DJDaniels stated you should take up with judge at hearing, utterly against Human Rights regulations. RM also refused to issue a defence, saying will become clear at hearing, so sent various documents, did not know what they may raise, INCLUDED THE 2003 CORRSPONDENCE SO COURT KNEW I COULD USE PROCEEDINGS V ROYAL MAIL. Heard by DJWatson who states both of you want to address me, where I state I have no defence , where told do you really want to come back, RM barrister states I want struck out, court had stated I had ignored court order to supply reference numbers, [no I had not court removed from file]why is court contacting RM, my copy shows as stamped/dated I had not ignored court order. At hearing 3 OTHER DOCUMENTS TAKEN BY HAND MY COPIES STAMPED BY THE COURT HAD BEEN REMOVED BY THE COURT FROM FILE. Can I quote DJWatson,,,,,,,,,,somethind very very odd here. From claim form for claims, a typed copy is also sent , as can form if required later part of the POC when claim made. RM now offer no defence and claim paid.

So we have the court removing documents from my file, or if applications made for court orders the court just ignores.

2YJ03757..DJWatson strikes out as not a clear statement of fact, although he heard OBS08441 a few months before, ask for oral hearing. .From master produced,used in OBS08441 state this is an abuse of process, only changes are names /address and item lost, between POC in OBS08441/2YJ03757. I produced master as all I had to do was insert new names/comments. Issue could not be more clear as in this claim master,for 2YJ03757,,,,,,,,,,,,,under regulation in 7.4 I was claiming under , I tick auction valuation again, however state barrister may have accepted under list not exhaustive do not know as offered no defence in OBS08441. DJBrittan told an abuse of process, where told not interested, will not look at , a judge who will go any length to frustrate the judicial process. From POC in this claim on the 10.2.2012 I sent a 1950 facup final programme to Aldridges of ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,BS23EX. Claim again under your regulation 7.4 auction valuation or list not exhaustive. Start at hearing, abuse of process will not consider, will go to any length to frustrate the judicial process,corrupt he knows this is an abuse of process. From POC as stated go to their regulations, 7.4 where accept an auction valuation, as proof of value.

Can I quote from POC,

AUCTION VALUATION WHERE FROM OXFORD DICTIONARY AN AUCTION DEFINED ,,,,,PUBLIC SALE WHERE ARTICLES SOLD TO HIGHEST BIDDER

THE ITEM LOST IN SIMILAR CONDITION TO ITEM SOLD BY THIRD PARTY ON EBAY. REFERENCE YOUR BOOK MAIL MADE EASY ....MARKET VALUE REQUIRED THE RECENT SALE BY THIRD PARTY GIVES MARKET VALUE .FURTHER TRADE PUBLICATION .....MARKET VALUE GIVEN.

CAN I REFER TO COURT CASE OBS08441 WHERE YOU HAD SUMMARY OF ABOVE ON THE ,,,,,,,,I SENT ,,,TO,,,,AND CLAIMING UNDER THIRD PARTY SALE ON EBAY OF SAME ITEM SIMILAR CONDITION WHERE YOUR BARRISTER ACCEPTED AS PROOF OF VALUE AND COMMUNICATIONS FROM MS DRAWWATER LEGAL DEPARTMENT ,,,,,,,,,,WE HAVE NO GROUNDS FOR ANY APPEAL AND MONEY WILL BE SENT IN REASPONCE TO MY LETTER AS CLAIM NOT PAID AS COURT JUDGEMENT.

We have judgement DJWatson was right not a clear statement of fact, would be in trouble, HOWEVER states in the N460 claim easy to make,,,on the,,,,,,he sent,,,,,,,,,,to,,,,,,,,,,,,of,,,,,,,,,,,and regulations he was claiming under. further from RM defence they confirm on the 10.2.2012 I sent a 1950 cup final programme to Aldridges ,,,,,,,,,,,,,and claiming under 7.4. There defence we do not know if third party sale or one he made on ebay/paypal. IN POC THIS OPTION IN LIST OF 7.4 CROSSED OUT eg not Ebay . So it appears I did give a clear statement of fact.

NEVER DISCUSSED AT HEARING ALTHOUGH 2003 DOCUMENTS IN FILE AGAIN HE STATES RM ARE IMMUNE FROM PROCEEDINGS. He had judged case before hearing, never raised at hearing, eg he had a closed mind before hearing, Sharing v Preston cc [2012] EWHC 515 , acceptable as grounds for judicial review. He is aware he can state any nonsense where if asking for an appeal Denyer would reject.

REQUEST FOR ORAL HEARING UNDER CPR 52.3[4]

Denyer ignores, which is his tactics where he knows the court/any defendant has no defence, application to Administration court , where in their order told twice again to ask Denyer for oral hearing , again as in OBS08441 taken by hand my copies stamped by the court he again ignores to frustrate the judicial process.The issue under Strickson v Preston cc [2007] EWHC 1132 , for judicial review under frustration of the judicial process where Denyer knows DJBrittan was wrong, I did make a clear statement of fact,,,,,,,,,,on the,,,,,,,,,,,i sent,,,,,,,,to,,,,,,,,,,,,,.In 2003 documents RM state I can recover loss in litigation.

Again using master,,,,, NEW claim paid by RM, who state head of legal services had left we want to turn over a new page, and 2YJ03757 should have been paid, SO 2YJ03757 WAS A CLEAR STATEMENT OF FACT AS THEY UNDERSTOOD NEW CLAIM. THE ADMINISTRATION COURT NOW STRIKES OUT AS I HAD,,,,,,,,,,NOT AVALIED MYSELF TO CORRECT BY ASKING FOR ORAL HEARING ALTHOUGH MY COPIES STAMPED BY THE COURT .AS IN OBS08441 IS THE COURT BINNING MY APPLICATIONS. FURTHER CALL,,,,,,,,,,,,,COURT/DENYER OUT TO GET YOU DO NOT APPROVE OF SOME OF YOUR APPLICATIONS TO MY COURT, HOWEVER WILL NOT STAND BY WHILE CORRUPTION IS GOING ON ONE OF YOUR APPLICATIONS DENYER HAS FORGOTTEN TO REMOVE FOR ORAL HEARING. IN RECORDING WITH MR BLAIR IN COURT OFFICE CONFIRMS THEY HAD MISSED AND NOT REMOVED FROM COURT FILE TO PERVERT THE COURSE OF JUSTICE. WE HAVE LATER APPLICATION TO COURT OF APPEAL, WHERE THEY PRODUCE BUNDLE WITH ONE APPLICATION FOR ORAL HEARING, ASKED IF I WANT TO ADD FURTHER WHERE TOLD WE NEED OTHER 2 ALSO. WE HAVE JUDGEMENT THERE WAS NO FRUSTRATION OF THE JUDICIAL PROCESS, YOU HAD NEVER ASKED FOR A ORAL HEARING. THIS JUDGEMENT UTTERLY CORRUPT, BY SAYING YOU MADE NO APPLICATIONS THE COURT IN CORRUPT WAY CAN SAY THERE WAS NO FRUSTATION OF COURT SYSTEM, YOU NEVER MADE APPLICATION.

So again we have Denyers court removing documents from my files. and ignoring request applications for court orders.

INTERACTION WITH NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST.

Again need to go to main facts, detail in sites. Trust refuse to supply medical records, so proceedings issued, AOIBS346. Trust lawyer Ms Smith in malicious way goes to court whining to DJWatson as trust unaware of possible proceedings. This was misleading the court, email 13.7.2013 told if no reply by 1.8.2013, I would issue proceedings, Ms Smith maintain you sent email to Ms Needs who was on holiday, recent email from Ms Needs confirms she was not on holiday, Ms Smith does not know what is true and what is false. Limited medical records supplied, where I had recordings with different departments that still medical records outstanding, these supplied much later in final settlement, .DJWatson strikes out in papers where I ask for oral hearing, from recordings medical records still outstanding. I HAD EVERYRIGHT TO APPEAL JUDGEMENT AS SUPPLIED NEARLY A YEAR LATER. CAN WE CALL DENYER 2. NO REPLY FOR ORAL HEARING AGAIN,

AOIBS746 ,,,This was a claim to add statement to medical records, eg NHS Choices ,,,,,,if you require to have your records amended is refused the record holder must attach a statement of your views to the record. Although document sent nearly 30 times Ms Smith refused to do. The second part I sent tickets so I could be paid travel expenses . Ms Smith ignored all correspondence, so proceedings issued now Ms Smith states in defence ,,,,we do not know what records he wants to add a statement, however quotes event in her defence. AOIBS346 issued under new regulations should have been older regulation, In AO1BS746 apology to court/defendants ask to amend or remove claim and reissue, application again ignored, where later DJRowe strikes out. Ms Smith asked as regulations to allow me again to add statement, where she states no case struck out, however NHS regulations state she must allow me to add a statement. Ask for oral hearing DENYER 1 where again Denyer ignores application. Would argue asked for order to amend, or remove and reissue, or via

Stuart v Goldberg [2008] EWCA Civ 1 ,,,,,,,,,,,the raising of a defence in later proceedings may without more amount to abuse if court satisfied the defence could have been raised in previous proceedings, ,,,,,,,,,,,,[they had accepted previous claim under new regulations. Denyer ignores application as clearly I had every right to appeal judgement. Further in second part, although have tickets to pay travel expenses Ms Smith refuses to pay, of note much later as they ask to settle, money paid and statement added to records.

NEGLIGENCE CLAIM. [Smith again with Mr Stoner NHSLA ]

a/ Sent for xray trust state no abnormaility to account for impingement of shoulder

b/ Sent to CATS where told I need to inject into shoulder and do physiotherapy however not qualified to inject.

c/ Sent to surgeon Dr Dwyer who injects asks for urgent physiotherapy in 2 months [2/12] and in 2/12 will decide if required to operate.

d/ After 1/12 heard nothing visited physiotherapy told trivial no physiotherapy,. Contacted consultant Mr Packham via letter/phonecall, records of call from BT from home to his office, however maintains no contact. Trust admit refusal to treat, so had to pay myself for physiotherapy.

e/ After 2/12 seen by surgeon told too late now physiotherapy not required and put down for surgery. [consultation recorded]

f/ Complaint to trust, where maintain i never contacted Packham, however deception exposed from BT phone records.

g/ As being called dishonest, ask for new surgical firm, however still get appointments to see Packham, where trust Ms Needs issues apology due to harassment as continue sending for me to see Packham. From emails from trust, confirm request asking for new surgical firm, in final settlement of AOIBS347,,,,,Ms Smith states,,,,,,,,,,,request for new firm will be addressed when I deal with negligence claim.

The reply from Stoner/Smith could have come from the court. Do not address Ms Poulson saying not qualified to treat. Saying you should not have paid for physiotherapy, as offered physiotheraspy AFTER you saw surgeon second time, however he states at consultation too late not required now, and puts down for surgery. They state you made no request for a different surgical firm to operate, where we have emails for example,,,,,,,,,,,,,i understand your making a request for new surgical team at NBT. Complain as I had not seen Packham as appointments given, I did not attend, where trust UTTERLY aware I was not coming as required new team, can I quote from email,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,i will not see Packham, where later Ms Needs issues apology due to harassment over these appointments sent.

The report of Smith/Stoner utterly corrupt, as behaviour in this matter. From regulations knew acting in person, therefore knew I had to be sent Protocol document, sent after 6/12. From regulations knew if still a dispute eg rejection of claim, go for arbitration, bet trust refuse, reply required in 3 days.

Denyer makes order I had to ask his permission before proceedings could be issued, quotes DENYER 1 AND 2 and case v Compuwave. as reason. Well you have evidence for example medical records were not complete reason I appealed DJWatsons order records only supplied by trust in final settlement. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Compuwave produced a program to do a job that was not fit for purpose, later admitted wrong program , asked to settle and Tomlin order sent to the court to conclude,. DJWatson asks who signed order for Compuwave, to conclude, where at a later date claim struck out. This is a claim settled,. DENYERS ORDER IS MALICIOUS .

Six weeks ago the corruption continues, knew result asked Denyer for permission to issue proceedings over negligence claim, [as in request for oral hearing in 2YJ03757, where told court out to get you, where applications binned/removed to pervert the course of justice]. Knew he would ignore,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, future emails, ,,,,,if no reply 5.4.2016 will assume refusal to reply. Trust refuse to go to arbitration, Denyer makes sure I can not issue proceedings, leaving me via these corrupt people disabled.

So again to pervert the course of justice the corrupt court will not answer applcatications to it. As they did in 2YJ03757, from call ,,,,,,,court out to get you, as that call stated Denyer made a mistake one of applications they have forgotten to remove from computer records, checked recorded call at court with Mr Blair, yes one on system, also sent to the Higher court. The court judgements ,,,,,,,,no evidence he asked for a oral hearing to correct the issue is utterly corrupt. The court utterly corrupt.

DETAILS

1/ In at 2003 there is a case in the Bristol County Court v Royal Mail, BS315289 . I believed they were using a loophole not to pay claim, and contacted a national newspaper. Had a angry response from Royal Mail, told do not go running to newspaper, I suggest you read our defence, we state in defence, you CAN recover your loss in court proceedings, saying in defence quoting our regulations, we can amend regulation as we feel fit, and you can recover your lost via forthcoming court proceedings. In correspondence, they state hope last time in court, however if future claims arise we will allow you to recover loss in court proceedings. I confirm this agreement with proof of posting. At hearing Royal Mail lose case, as DJ Stewart Brown stated in judgement, a defence to waste her and my time. She raises the issues of paradox at hearing, via other cases she had heard, against Royal Mail and this issue never raised at hearing.

2/ A claim arises v Eaga. Before hearing a separate independant claim arises, unknown when the particulars of claim [POC] was issued. I informed the court about this additional claim, and asked for it to be included with claim already issued, copy to Eaga. Unknown until much later, I had done everything correct, from barristers advice. He quoted the case of Stuart v Goldberg and Anor [2008] EWCA Civ 2. Eg

This conclusion is I think highlighted by the approach of this court in Aldi. The facts of that case were very different from this. I refer the reader to the report of that case for the detailed facts. However to put the position shortly, in the second action the defendants were, as Longman LJ put it at [41], facing a claim by the appellant [Aldi] for the first time. Moreover ,Aldi had made its intension to bring future claims, clear in letters, dated 13 June and 4 Sept 2003,to which it received no reply. None of the parties had, however made the position clear to the court.This court held that a second action was not an abuse of process, and that the judge at first instance had erred in principle in holding that it was. After reaching that conclusion, Thomas LJ, said this about the future in such cases, I also wish to add a word as to the approach that should be adopted if a similar problem arises in the future. In circumstances such as those that arose in this case, the proper course is to raise the issue with the court.

There is no doubt I had raised issue with Bristol County Court , who were happy for 2 trials to take place. Further from Stuart v Goldberg

For my part I do not think that parties should keep future claims secret merely because a second claim might involve other issuers.The PROPER course is for parties to put their cards on the table, so that no one is taken by surprise, and the appropriate course in case management can be considered by the judge.

Further from Stuart v Goldberg

As Lord Bingham observed the crucial question is whether in all the circumstances a party is misusing or abuse of process of the court by seeking to raise before it an issue which could have been raised before, further as Lord Bingham put it, there will rarely be a finding of abuse, unless the later proceedings involver what the court regards as the unjust harassment of a party.

Eaga were asked to include in the first claim, refused my request, so have no complaint as second claim made, the court has no complaint, I had from above put my cards on the table, in respect to second claim.

3/ THE INITIAL CLAIM V EAGA

There are 2 independent central heating systems, denoted A and B. In discussion with Eagas Ms Suggest, after initial inspection A would be replaced, and B water cylinder would be removed for inspection, to see if repair, or replacement of system B was required also. This agreement was denoted in contract to settle claim, by Eaga, called EPL1. I was told nothing wrong with cylinder B. Fuses were blowing in house, contractor instructed that reason fuses blowing as leak in water cylinder, B, and due to corrosion in fittings to cylinder the cylinder had not been removed as contract EPL1. Eaga inspected, recorded conversation, they maintain corrosion not present when they inspected 2 weeks before, if it were we would have repaired cylinder, as contract EPL1, HOWEVER in later document admit ",,,,,,,,," leaking over a considerable period of time. Contact Eaga lawyer, send copy of tape, to the court, and ask court to use tape recording, the court states you can not bring in your own recording equipment, must be organised with the court, need permission from Eaga to use recording. Have no reply from Eaga, to use recording, on day of hearing, the lawyer for Eaga in waiting room asks if I have tape. This is proved as sat next to the ITV sports reporter, there with his mother as trying to remove students from a house. So the lawyer fully aware as emailed before, and from above knew they were contracted to work on both systems,.and would repair system B, [in bundle was their report ",,,," leaking over a very long period of time] At hearing he maintains contract to work only on system A, however from EPL1 he contradicts as it states working on both systems. Further from transcript, when Ms Suggetts emails are produced he states his client is utterly unaware of Ms Suggett. The case heard by DDJGisby, who I understand is a lawyer in Bristol, from barrister I contacted. We still have the additional claim v Eaga, where Eagas lawyer asks at hearing for order that it should not return to the court. DDJGisby from above is aware from above I had put my cards on the table about this new claim, where Eaga/court were happy to resolve at a second hearing. Ask for DDJGisbys notes, where he states on reflection, something odd with this case. The case ends up in judicial review, before Lord Goldring, who stated I can help you with this after reading papers he asks, is DJ Roath one of your district judges, I did not know. As he explained a DJ could not hear an appeal, and asks his clerk to make enquires. It appears HHJRoath is a high court judge, where Lord Goldring states why can the Bristol court not issue proper paperwork., as judgement stated made by DJRoath. although the Bristol court got verdict wrong this is not a reason to grant a judicial review, Strickson v Preston County Court 2007. EWCA 1132 Further the Bristol County Court were utterly legally flawed, [return to later] having appeal hearing without a transcript of hearing. As Lord Goldring in judgement stated, although you have lost the application for judicial review, I have discretion over award to Bristol County Court given in papers before, [£500.00] which will be quashed, I am sorry I can not do anything in respect to award given by Bristol County Court to Eaga. I HAVE NEVER BEEN FORGIVEN FOR THIS JUDGEMENT. Complain to Eaga over perverting the course of justice, in reply their lawyer states, Ms Suggett was person who dealt with your application,its too late now for you to do anything, . In respect to recording, he states I was nor perverting the course of justice, I did not know about recording, until you raised late in hearing. I missed your email I was on holiday, when you asked to use recording at hearing. But he did know he asked BEFORE hearing if I had bought tape with me, so he knew of evidence , and then corrupted the judicial process. Further had answered my email, and however ignored request to use recording.

4/ THE SECOND CLAIM AGAINST EAGA

Eaga state an abuse of process, eg trying to overturn the judgement of DDJGisby where he rejected their application, when they asked for a order that this new claim should not be allowed to return to the courts. The claim comes before DJBrittan. In judgement we have a contradiction from transcript of hearing, saying yes an abuse of process, trying to relitagate previous claim, however also states ",,,,," WHAT EVER THIS CLAIM IS I DO NOT UNDERSTAND IT. [Later the reader will see DJBrittan is a one trick pony, in judgements he issues, in another claim the particulars of claim state, on the ",,,,,,,," sent ",,,,,,,,," to ",,,,,,,,," and claim from your regulations, 7.4, start from this out at hearing, where he states in judgement 5 mins later claim easy to make, on the ",,,," he sent ",,,,,,,,," to ",,,,,,,,," and regulations he was claiming under, NONE of this data before the court.]he does not understand claim how can he say a abuse of process. There must be some overlap in evidence, we have initial claim, then new evidence becomes available, new claim, we ask the court to include new claim in first case against Eaga however the court happy to have 2 hearings. DJBrittan admits he does not understand claim, from transcript makes no effort to determine facts, determined case before hearing, and concludes an abuse of process as evidence from first claim quoted in second claim, in history there must be some overlap, eg initial claim, then second claim becomes apparent, which issue has never been before the court.The issue again covered in Stuart v Goldberg [2008]

I do not regard it as significance that Mr Stuart when preparing his particulars of claim in the 2005 action, acting in person copied large parts of the 2000 action in which the factual background to the matters at issue were set out. Obviously there was a lot of common ground between the subject matter of the 2 actions. Inclusion of the same text in the 2 statements of case, especially given Mr Stuart was acting for himself ,does not seem to me to demonstrate by itself that either claim should have been included with the other claim. The overlap between the 2 actions, need to be assessed by reference to the substance of the respective claims, not by limited comparison of the 2 statements of case.

By his own admission DJBrittan could not do any comparison as he admits he does not understand claim. At hearing we have love in between DJBrittan and Eaga, ",,,,,,," so nice of you to come all the way from Newcastle to see us, asked to leave so they could discuss further. Eaga state we have to catch a plane, can not talk. In investigations had many hours before flight, took up issue with Eaga, in reply ",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,," true, however would not be seen discussing case behind your back, for you to exploit later. DJBrittan in bundle has pages from transcript of first case, ",,,,,," Ms Suggett unknown to us,and letter from Eaga , Ms Suggett was person who dealt with you, too late now for you to do anything. Has contract EPL1 where it states we were working on both systems A and B, however from transcript states contract to work only on system A. We then have white being called black, saying i have insulted Eaga, you can not deal with a district judge who is given evidence and just ignores it. The issue goes to leave to appeal, and judicial review, heard by HHJBeatson. Very clear verdict before hearing, told the judge who heard your leave to appeal a very fine man, and your asking for me to go behind his back. He does not look at me, looks along bench, with arms folded. Explain from transcript DJBrittan states ",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,," what ever this claim is i do not understand it. Stopped, yes he did understand claim, turn to page ",,,,,,,,,,,,,," he states an abuse of process, he did understand your claim.

We have conclusions we need to return to later

a/ We have DJBrittan although he has clear evidence , showing bias, I was not insulting Eaga, he had clear evidence they were perverting the course of justice, I refer to these claims on the internet, if untrue why have Eaga not sued for libel.

5/ In making a claim for lost mail, you fill in their form, on the ",,,,,,,,,," I sent ",,,,,,,,,,," to "..........." and you claim under their regulations, 7.4 which includes an auction as something they will accept as proof of value. I use an Ebay sale [an auction] where a third party sold same item as my lost item, similar condition. Can we call this TEMPLATE BRITTAN. Accepted by Roual Mail as they pay claim. Later the PRP [postal review panel, appeal arm of Royal Mail ] state acceptable as proof of value. Royal Mail state we will say any nonsense to you or the courts to reject/delay your claims, money no object to us. If you want money go to court.

6/ We have claim number v Royal Mail 0BS08441. 3 parts

a) a recorded delivery lost item to the court, later at hearing state a misunderstanding, put down for payment, however not paid.

b) again a recorded delivery lost item, Royal Mails head of legal services states, I am not paying, will prove I am right, and will send to our appeal department, PRP, [POSTAL REVIEW PANEL] who found for me.

c) In making a claim, obtain a GPO proof of posting slip to confirm claim made. Defendants state, regulations are such we need original recorded/proof of posting delivery slip, you have not supplied, we will not pay now ",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,," f*** off.

In the particulars of claim case 1, I reference defendants letter of the ",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,," which gives their reference number. Ms Drawwater knows reference number also of claim b, as claim on her desk, she had sent to PRP. No reference number for claim 3, as claim lost. Ms Drawwater asks for reference numbers so they can do a defense, [eg to delay claim] DDJO Neil gives order, reference numbers supplied to the court, taken by hand my copy stamped/dated by the court. THE START OF THE COURT REMOVING DOCUMENTS FROM FILE. The claim c/ then arrives, at Royal Mail, understand they filed in wrong place, however no defence to claim, so ask via order SEVERAL times for a defence. Ask Royal Mail told will become clear at hearing, we have discussed with the court, have appointed a senior barrister, will be looking for about £2,000.00 in costs. So covered issues in letter that I believed defendants may raise, which included the 2003 correspondence where defendants in defence state I can recover loss in court proceedings, and correspondence that this would relate to future claims should they arise. As in the Eaga case, inform the court claim arrived,at defendants, enclosed new particulars of claim, as proof of value, TEMPLATE BRITTAN rejected,by Royal Mail, and need a court order to amend my initial claim. All correspondence ignored, in the end ask again, Mr Blair in court office informs me ",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,," DJDaniels has no comment to make, and to take up with judge that hears case. DJDaniels is utterly aware, this is a breach of the Human Rights Act, Article 6, as I will not know defence until hearing. At hearing, case heard by DJWatson. He starts with comment both of you wish to address me. I make point I have no defence, where he states do you really want to come back after I order a defence. The barrister for Royal Mail states I want case struck out as he ignored court order to supply reference numbers of his claim, confirmed by the court to us. I had my copy stamped/dated by the court I had answered order. DJWatson states, DDJO Neil in order states if you do not answer court order, she would strike out, she must have seen your document, as she put down for hearing. It arose 3 other documents, taken by hand stamped /’dated by the court were also missing, where DJWatson states something very, very odd here. We may ask DJDaniels is aware the court wrote to defendants saying I had ignored court order, why he did not strike out claim. Further I assume also removed the court wrote to me stating date I answered court order, this would mean out of time, as Lord Goldring stated in Eaga case, why can the Bristol court not issue proper paperwork. The court argues the date we state was day we put on system, which is not date I served on defendants/court, my copy stamped by the court. At hearing the barrister then states we can not pay for valuables, I knew defined as money/jewellery only how can I find in over a hundred pages of regulations this definition. I start to pack up papers, say the whole system corrupt, under my breath, was going directly to media, where DJWatson intervenes and states I do not consider as valuables. The claims a/ b/ already settled, where outstanding claim c/ defendants offer no defence and accept TEMPLATE BRITTAN as proof of value, and claim paid.

7/ Claim 2YJ03757 V Royal Mail. In initial claim to Royal Mail state same issue as claim 3 in OBS08441, eg TEMPLATE BRITTAN. They wish to relitagate OBS08441, an issue already determined by the court, and say again TEMPLATE BRITTAN not proof of value. This is an abuse of process, defendants had paid claim, then later in proceedings OBS08441 accepted as proof of value. We have DJWatson who heard OBS08441 saying in papers, he does not understand claim, and strikes out, court order stated DJBrittan made order, please note Lord Goldrings observation, why can the Bristol court not issue proper paperwork. Further I had no basis of a claim, however heard same case weeks before. Ask for a oral hearing heard by DJBrittan. I state this is an abuse of process, same claim paid by customer services, and in OBS08441. DJBrittan states I am not interested, will not look at evidence, and will not be bound by it. I had a internet barrister chambers article on abuse of process, including GoreWood v Johnson [2000] UKHL 65

"......" should not be vexed a second time over same facts when issue determined by the court ",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,," the court in disrepute if we have different verdicts to same facts ",,," [as we have today]

Where DJBrittan states, have you full transcript of hearing, no, then I will ignore evidence, Compare and contrast the Eaga case, over abuse of process. Clearly he would go to any length to corrupt and frustrate the judicial process. Where Eaga state an abuse of process and he considers evidence. I go through claim on the ",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,," I sent ",,,,,,,,,,,,," to ",,,,,,,,,," and claim via defendants regulations, 7.4 an auction valuation as proof of value, eg TEMPLATE BRITTAN, where 5 mins later he states, confirmed in rejecting claim in N460 form, there is nothing in any documents to show ",,,,,,,,,,,," on the ",,,,,,,,,,," he sent ",,,,,,,,,,,," to ",,,,,,,,,,,," and regulations he was claiming under. You can not deal with a district judge who is shown evidence, [stated also in defence of Royal Mail] on the ",,,,,,,," he sent ",,,,,,,," to ",,,,,,,," ] and 5 mins later state he is not aware of evidence. IAs a barristers chambers stated where are we Russia/China. You can not deal with DJBrittan who will go to any length to corrupt/frustrate the judicial process. In the N460 he states Royal Mail are immune from proceedings, this was NEVER raised at hearing, IN ANY FORM. clearly he had a closed mind, had judged case before hearing, grounds for a judicial review, Sharing v Preston County Court [2012] EWHC 515. The issue never raised, where I could have presented 2003 evidence. He further states I can not be expected to trawl through papers to find details of claim. By doing this would show bias and would mean I am acting as an advocate of that party presenting their claim, this is not the duty of a district judge. The issue of immunity from proceedings NEVER raised in any form at hearing, he had trawled through papers, and presented case for Royal Mail. By his own definition, the hearing was bias and he was acting as an advocate for defendants, grounds for a judicial review Strickson v Preston County Court [2007 EWHC 1132]. Its like going to court over a speeding offence, and when you get home get judgement [in my case N460] that found guilt of another offence, which was never put to me at hearing. Compare and contrast Eaga case, this time told I insult defendants and the court. I insulted no one, not even a matter for discussion. In Eaga case Ms Suggett was person I dealt with, admitted by Eaga, they state contract was to work on both systems, EPL1,however at hearing state only working on one system. From recording left with the court Eaga STATE contract to work on both systems. In this case Royal Mail knew their reference numbers, and never insulted the court, I had no defence to claim 3 OBS08441 , if we could get a transcript of 0BS08441 as DJWatson states ",,,,,,,,,,,,," do you really want to come back after you get a defence. Further were documents removed from my file, lets see from DJWatson stated over missing documents ",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,," something very very odd here, the reader later will see the practice of the court removing documents to pervert the course of justice, is still going on. DJWatson from transcript would show he confirms, I was not given a defence, clear breach of HRA Article 6,and documents delivered by hand , my copies stamped by the court, had been removed by the court to pervert the course of justice.

8/ Ask for leave to appeal in papers, rejected in order of HHJDenyer 3.10.2012, envelope franked 11.10.2012. Via CPR 52.3 [4] you are allowed to ask for reconsideration in a oral hearing. We have the nonsense DJWatson struck out as particulars of claim, not a clear statement of fact, and DJBrittan stating the particulars of claim should be in form ",,,,,,,,,,," on the ",,,,,,,,,," he sent ",,,,,,," to ",,,,,,,,," and regulations he was claiming under ",,,,,,,,,,,,,," but this was IDENTICAL form of my particulars of claim, WORD FOR WORD. The other issue immunity never raised at hearing, from 2003 BS315289 they state I can recover loss in court proceedings, and later correspondence confirm i can recover loss in future court proceedings if they arise. We have had several cases v Royal Mail, then in OBSO8441, they are asked if they wish to raise immunity issue where they say no. From Stuart v Goldberg [2008] EWCA Civ 1.

The raising of a defence in later proceedings may without more amount to abuse if court satisfied the defence could have been raised in previous proceedings.

This is abuse of process all the way around, this is a issue where Royal Mail have paid claim, they go to court OBS08441 where they offer NO DEFENCE to claim, TEMPLATE BRITTAN IS PROOF OF VALUE and later the reader will find they pay identical claim and apologise for court issue. We have had 5 cases before the court from 2003, from Stuart v Goldberg , why have defendants not raised issue, raising a defence now is an abuse as could have been raised before. In OBS08441/ BS315289 asked if they wish to raise issue, where they state no, due to agreement in 2003. To be fair to Royal Mail they did not raise at hearing, it was raised by DJBrittan after hearing in his N460,issue never discussed at hearing, by his own definition he was acting as an advocate for defendants, and further hearing was biased by his definition.. So the issue before the court, did I give a clear statement of fact, yes, WORD FOR WORD as defined by DJBrittan. Are defendants immune from proceedings, no, they state in defence BS315289 I can recover loss, in court proceedings, in correspondence confirm I can recover my loss via proceedings, from Stuart v Goldberg, IF they wish to raise now, I would argue, the issue could have been raised in earlier proceedings, if raised now an abuse. So this is issue for the appeal. Go to the court to ask for oral hearing, told out of time, we will not accept application, HHJDenyer would not consider application, this conversation cited in application made 12.10.2012. The order dated 3.10.2012, franked envelope, 11.10.2012, I could not make application in 7 days. Application for oral hearing made via post, as court would not accept, GPO proof of posting 12.10.2012. Due to sinister message of the court contacted lawyers LyonsDavidson. Where told adamant they will not give a oral hearing, we need to go to the court of appeal. I refer to my correspondence as believed judicial review was route. The court of appeal confirmed I was correct , after obtaining franked envelope, plus, application filed 12.10.2012, and in discussion suggest an application for judicial review.

9/ APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW. The Administration court confirms LyonsDavidsons advice, in a court order , you are allowed to make application for reconsideration via a oral hearing, CPR 52.3 [4], instructed to make another application to the Bristol court for a oral hearing.. While obtaining forms for application , told again HHJDenyer would not look at, the court determined not to give a oral hearing, to pervert the course of justice, it would appear again this conversation quoted in application 1.2.2013, asking for a oral hearng. So application taken again to the Bristol court, stamped by the court 1.2.2013, for a oral hearing, no reply. Then get second order, that I had not availed myself to correct issues as I had not asked for a oral hearing, discuss with Administration court lawyer, Cardiff , conversation recorded , where told to ask again for a oral hearing, taken by hand, my receipt stamped/dated by the court 18.2.2013. Ask lawyers Ashfords to deal with issue. The court has several applications for transcripts of OBS08441/2YJ03757, all applications ignored. So we have 3 applications for a oral hearing, 12.10.2012, 1 and 18.2.2013. Then Ashfords given judicial review final judgement that no one turned up for hearing. Ashfords maintain never told of hearing, for example after date of order we were via internet emails discussing brief for barrister at Guildhall chambers Bristol. For example Ashfords in history, state DJWatson in OBS08441 was removing documents from my file, we can not say this, we know removed, confirmed in transcript of OBS08441, by DJWatson, but to say the judge removed to pervert the course of justice is utter nonsense, with no proof. A complaint made to the legal ombudsman , who in judgement suggest a refund of fees , however from full file, the allegations that Ashfords did not inform me of hearing, had no merit, it was clear not told of hearing, reason you did not know. The Administration court states your only route via the court of appeal. The court determined the transcripts of OBS08441/2YJ03757 they would not produce, and tries to corrupt the judicial system, as they do not inform me of hearing.

10/ APPLICATION TWO TO THE COURT OF APPEAL. Shortly afterwards the identical claim arises TEMPLATE BRITTAN. In claim as legal advice they are told as in 2YJ03757 same legal issue as OBS08441/2YJ03757, where they pay claim return of post. Contact Royal Mail ask why paid after above. Told Ms Drawwater head of legal ,services Royal Mail dealt with you in 2003, was one of first cases she dealt with when she joined us in 2003, she has now gone, we want to turn over a new page, and put pass behind us, asked to confirm, which was done in email. So we know the claim had merit, had been paid by customer services, then in chronological order paid in 0BS08441, any other hearing an abuse of process, and after 2YJ03757 now TEMPLATE BRITTAN paid. The Bristol county court confirms the Administration court was correct, you had not asked us for a oral hearing. Then had a call, saying the court has been out to get you for sometime, will not stand by while corruption is going on , the Bristol county court has made a mistake, one of your applications for a oral hearing, they have forgotten to remove from system, if you check on system, applications were binned by the court to pervert the course of justice. It appears the application 1.2.2013 is on system as it states on the 13.2.2013 it was sent to the Administration court. Take up issue with the court, Mr Blair in court office confirms sent to the Administration court, in terms of application 18.2.2003, we did not put on system but sent directly to the Administration court. If he did not file, after all this time its strange he can quote he sent to the Administration court. There is a court order from the Administration court, to ask again for a oral hearing, in applications taken by hand, stamped by the court as received, the court has the court order, if Mr Till [who deals with appeals ] ignored court order, and sent to the Administration court, not to HHJDenyer then a complaint to the court made in November 2014, Mr Fowler again to pervert the course of justice refuses to answer complaint. We ask again several times for transcripts, all request ignored, the court determined evidence would not be before the court, for example DJBrittan had judged case before hearing, from his own definition the hearing was biased and he was acting as an advocate for Royal Mail, for example asked for 240.00 in costs, in 2YJ03757, where he awards 500.00. The court prepares bundle for hearing ,for example IT HAS THE APPLICATION 12.10.2012, asked if I wish to add documents, which I do eg applications 1 and 18.2.2013, stamped by court as received , and correspondence from Royal Mail as they had paid now identical claim. We have judgement, that no evidence I had asked for a oral hearing, in the bundle prepared BY THE COURT it has the application, with proof of posting 12l.10.2013. The court informs me the additional documents I sent would be considered by the judge, so he considered the applications, 1 and 18.2.2013 asking for a oral hearing. As Lord Goldring stated the court wrong, hearing an appeal without a transcript, in final document to the court, I state I assume this will be heard without transcripts. Its clear the court does not want transcripts, to close down case, and pervert the course of justice. We have a particulars of claim in 2YJ03757, where I state on the ",,,,,,,,,,,,,,," I sent ",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,," to ",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,," and claim under regulations 7.4, an auction valuation, and 5 mins later, after going through evidence, DJBrittan states, claim easy to make, no data in any documents, [ITS THE PARTICLARS OF CLAIM, I HAVE JUST CITED 5 MINS BEFORE] on the ",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,," I sent ",,,,,,,,,,,,,,," to ",,,,,,,,,,,,,,," and regulations I was claiming under. Further the issue of immunity from proceedings never raised at hearing, he had judged case before hearing, grounds for a judicial review, Sharing V Preston CC [2007]. From Strickson v Preston county court, we have frustration of the judicial process, again grounds for a judicial review, I am allowed to make application, CPR 52.3[4] for a oral hearing to put matters right, we have the courts refusing to give a oral hearing, Of course they can do this to pervert the course of justice, if they ignore evidence before it and say you have not availed yourself to correct by asking for a oral hearing. The court then states to bury the miscarriage of justice, I could not take to the Supreme court. From the ECHR [EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS] McG, inley v UK [1969], there is a breach of my human rights, if the authorities denies existence of documents before it. It has applications for a oral hearing, stamped by the court, however in judgement states ",,,,,,,,,," no evidence I had asked for a oral hearing to correct matter.

11/ From evidence above, the Bristol court to pervert the course of justice, is removing documents from my files, for example DJWatson in OBS08441 something very very odd here, not only 3 documents taken by hand stamped by the court are missing, but DDJO Neil stated she would strike out if I did not answer court order, she must have seen as she put down for hearing, however your document removed from file. Discussed with police/Ms Mountstevens police commissioner, however refuse to investigate corruption. Further the evidence concerning Eaga, in defence to second claim state ",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,," contract to conclude denoted by contract EPL1, and he has obtained, which states working on both systems, however in first hearing state contract to work only on one system. We have the Bristol court saying, one of your applications for oral hearing on our system, so judgements are wrong. Via freedom of information ask Bristol court to confirm, all correspondence ignored. Contact the Administration court, again freedom of information, Bristol court states we sent applications for oral hearing, 1and 18.2.2013 to the Administration court, again from freedom of information ask them to confirm, all correspondence ignored, to pervert the course of justice. I have been told to pervert the course of justice, the application 18.2.2013 was binned. I have asked both courts of copy of application, with respect with no reply, suggest to reader it was binned to pervert the course of justice, and frustrate the judicial process. In last 10 days asked the Administration court again, saying with no reply in 7 days, extension of time on request, in 7 days, however with no reply will assume you refuse to reply. The court as the Bristol court can not reply, we have in judgement the Administration and court of appeal saying in judgement ",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,," you had not availed yourself, to correct by asking for a oral hearing, where the Bristol court has stated orally sent to the Administration court. In respect to application 18.2.2013, I have been told, binned to pervert the course of justice, we know delivered as stamped by the Bristol court. They produce application, which is fatal to judgement. Further on other hand if binned, proves they were perverting the course of justice, if they now can not produce application. Further suggest if sent to the Administration court, the Bristol court must have copy of letter, eg please find ",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,".

The corruption continues, courts given a final chance to respond. On the 22.7.2015 emailed the Administration court, asking for a reply in 7 days, time extended on request, with no reply in 7 days will assume refusal to answer. Realise the court in a difficult position, they issue order, no evidence ",,,," I availed myself to correct issue, by asking for a oral hearing, where the Bristol court states on our system, and we sent to the Administration court. Of course I realise problem, as told applications binned, to pervert the course of justice, Mr Fowler in the Bristol court office, to pervert the course of justice, tactically plans to ignore all request, for data, to pervert the course of justice. In the case Ass, Provincial Pictures Houses v Wednesbury Corp [1948] IKB 223, under Irrionality/Unreasonableness

,,decision so outrageous in its defiance of logic, or of acceptable moral standards no sensible person who applied his mind to the question to be decided could have arrived at it ",,,,,," court to observe procedural rules that are expressed laid down in the legislation by which its jurisdiction is conferred or failure to observe basic rules of natural iustice, or a failure to act with procedural fairness……

Lets consider this, the particulars of claim states, on the ",,,,,,,,,,,," he sent ",,,,,,,,,,,,," to ",,,,,,,,,,,," and claim under your regulations 7.4 [auction valuation ]. This is confirmed in defence. We have a judgement , claim easy to make ",,," on the ",,,,,,,,,,,," he sent ",,,,,,,,,,,,,," to ",,,,,,,,,,," and regulations he was claiming under, NON OF THIS DATA BEFORE THE COURT, "….." its so outrageous no sensible [only DJBrittan] would have come to this judgement. The procedural views as the Administration court STATES IN ORDER you can make an application via CPR 54.3 [2] for a oral hearing, by the court binning applications, to pervert the course of justice, we have failure to observe basic rules of natural justice. Its worth noting in OBS08441, defendants late paying claim, under Template Brittan claim. Ms Drawwater in correspondence states, sorry, cheque in post, only just heard from barrister, his advice ",,,,," we have NO GROUNDS for a appeal. So TEMPLATE BRITTAN is proof of value, [PRP defendants appeal section, states proof of value], and of course defendants not immune from proceedings,.

12/ Contact St Johns chambers Bristol to take to the European court, Mr Marsden states he has expertise, via deception, had to pay for a meeting, where he confirms later he has NEVER done an application. Refuse to do this application, over quantum of claim, however this was utter deception, as he knew quantum of claim 2 years before, so always knew he would not do application.

Via ombudsman Mr Marden now repays fees .The ombudsman states however Mr Marsden not clear what you wanted him to do , can i just say in letter end of 2014 to Mr Marsden ,,,,,,can you please do application to the ECHR. This is an issue where no one has any moral background as afraid to take on a utterly corrupt court. Even my MP Jack Lopresti states ,,,,,,i can not force the Bristol court to reply to my correspondence.

13/ Of interest, and directly relevant to practice of the Bristol County Court, is a claim against North Bristol NHS Trust for medical records . In www.northbristolnhstrustpublicconcerns.com is full details. We have corrupt trust, and again Bristol CC via HHJDenyer refusing to answer court orders as he did in 2yj03757 to pervert the course of justice. As call made he has been out to get you for sometime.,,,,,,He issues court order utterly without merit, states i must ask his permission to issue proceedings against trust, make application and then in corrupt way bin application as he did in 2YJ03757.

P JONES

REFERENCES