Re: Nothing matters anyway
Posted: Mon May 23, 2011 9:15 am
Phew. We're still here. Until December 21 2012 at any rate.
The independent home for discussions on the English Chess scene.
https://www.ecforum.org.uk/
We were hoping to save on this months ASDA bill so that was a bit of a disappointment.Phil Neatherway wrote:Phew. We're still here. Until December 21 2012 at any rate.
Time to attend another ECF election meeting thenJohn Upham wrote:Phil Neatherway wrote:
Apparently, It would seem that events have been put back until October 21, 2011 so at least we will have time to see the new season in.
It's made the BBC News so we are probably safe, unlike poor little RyanJonathan Bryant wrote:Poor old Ryan Giggs. If the world had ended he'd have got away with it.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog ... -live-blog
(link provided in case Carl or the mods have a super-injunction related fit)
I'm not so sure. However, your site, your call.Carl Hibbard wrote:It's made the BBC News so we are probably safe, unlike poor little RyanJonathan Bryant wrote:Poor old Ryan Giggs. If the world had ended he'd have got away with it.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog ... -live-blog
(link provided in case Carl or the mods have a super-injunction related fit)
David Sedgwick wrote:I'm not so sure. However, your site, your call.Carl Hibbard wrote:It's made the BBC News so we are probably safe, unlike poor little RyanJonathan Bryant wrote:Poor old Ryan Giggs. If the world had ended he'd have got away with it.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog ... -live-blog
(link provided in case Carl or the mods have a super-injunction related fit)
I wouldn't be so sure. It's not that simple with regards to contempt law. Just because he has revealed the name, doesn't necessarily remove the injunction.Paul McKeown wrote:Named by John Hemmings in the Commons using Parliamentary Privilege. Busted injunction.
Can you state in what way Parliamentary Privilege is not absolute in this regard?Rob Thompson wrote:I wouldn't be so sure. It's not that simple with regards to contempt law. Just because he has revealed the name, doesn't necessarily remove the injunction.Paul McKeown wrote:Named by John Hemmings in the Commons using Parliamentary Privilege. Busted injunction.
The report is everywhere now so I don't see it as a problem...David Sedgwick wrote:I'm not so sure. However, your site, your call.Carl Hibbard wrote:It's made the BBC News so we are probably safe, unlike poor little RyanJonathan Bryant wrote:Poor old Ryan Giggs. If the world had ended he'd have got away with it.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog ... -live-blog
(link provided in case Carl or the mods have a super-injunction related fit)
Paul McKeown wrote:Can you state in what way Parliamentary Privilege is not absolute in this regard?Rob Thompson wrote:I wouldn't be so sure. It's not that simple with regards to contempt law. Just because he has revealed the name, doesn't necessarily remove the injunction.Paul McKeown wrote:Named by John Hemmings in the Commons using Parliamentary Privilege. Busted injunction.
I believe that at the time of writing the injunction is technically still in place - but clearly it's not going to be enforceable. I also think I'm right in saying that The Sun have gone back to court (after losing earlier today) to get it formally removed.Rob Thompson wrote: Just because he has revealed the name, doesn't necessarily remove the injunction.