# FBH v ADC Judicial Review - update



## Colin Clark (Jun 15, 2014)

Hi All

Just back from London and the JR hearing.

The FBH was well represented, Ms Toland was there for the APA.

After three hours of hearing both sides of the case the Judge, decided to reserve judgement until a later date, this gives her the time to totally digest the case from all aspects before making a ruling, and the associated consequences.

In the meantime, theres the FBH conference on the 20th of June, and the I.H.S show on Sunday 21st June at Doncaster, which is a go, go, go.

See you there folks.

Regards
Colin 

__________________


----------



## Malc (Oct 27, 2009)

So it gets dragged out further.... Any indication as to when "later" is so this can be finalised once and for all ?


----------



## Colin Clark (Jun 15, 2014)

Hi Malc,

We are hoping for a speedy resolution to this, but my personal opinion is, I'd rather wait three months than three weeks and get the RIGHT result.

Sorry, as soon as we know, you all will know.

Regards


----------



## ian14 (Jan 2, 2008)

Malc said:


> So it gets dragged out further.... Any indication as to when "later" is so this can be finalised once and for all ?


It's frustrating, but not unsurprising. It is actually quite rare for a judge to return a ruling there and then. If he/she has delayed judgement to allow time to thoroughly read through everything, shows that the matter is being taken seriously.


----------



## Sid85 (Dec 18, 2012)

Thanks for the update. I have no idea how these things work, but did think it would be a surprise if the judge made a decision there and then.


----------



## corpselight (Jan 10, 2008)

Good-ish news, if she's taking time to consider the evidence, given the evidence is all on our side, last i heard.
Breeders are still able to sell live animals as stock, correct?


----------



## Malc (Oct 27, 2009)

ian14 said:


> It's frustrating, but not unsurprising. It is actually quite rare for a judge to return a ruling there and then. If he/she has delayed judgement to allow time to thoroughly read through everything, shows that the matter is being taken seriously.


I agree, but you would of thought that given it has taken a year or more from requesting the hearing, you would of thought that the judge would of gone through all the documentation etc submitted and then listened to the closing statements from both parties so to be in a better position to pass judgement.

I have to agree with the comments, at least it isn't being settled with a rash decision made on the day... and as Colin stated, it's probably better it takes a long time and get the right decision rather than a quick wrong one...


----------



## Natrix (Dec 9, 2006)

Malc said:


> I agree, but you would of thought that given it has taken a year or more from requesting the hearing, you would of thought that the judge would of gone through all the documentation etc submitted and then listened to the closing statements from both parties so to be in a better position to pass judgement.
> 
> I have to agree with the comments, at least it isn't being settled with a rash decision made on the day... and as Colin stated, it's probably better it takes a long time and get the right decision rather than a quick wrong one...


Remember that the FBH, Arun Council and the APA have all had over a year to put together their evidence. Having seen and read a lot of it I wouldn't want to see an answer too quick because it would mean the Judge hadn't read everything properly 

(unless it's totally in our favour of course, in which case she can give us the answer tomorrow:lol2
For now all sides playing the same waiting game.

Gordon


----------



## ian14 (Jan 2, 2008)

Malc said:


> I agree, but you would of thought that given it has taken a year or more from requesting the hearing, you would of thought that the judge would of gone through all the documentation etc submitted and then listened to the closing statements from both parties so to be in a better position to pass judgement.
> 
> I have to agree with the comments, at least it isn't being settled with a rash decision made on the day... and as Colin stated, it's probably better it takes a long time and get the right decision rather than a quick wrong one...


The judge hearing the application would not have been allocated when it was submitted.
In fact, in all likelihood he/she would have first had sight of the papers on the day of the hearing. Hence the delay in a decision.


----------



## kato (May 12, 2007)

ian14 said:


> The judge hearing the application would not have been allocated when it was submitted.
> In fact, in all likelihood he/she would have first had sight of the papers on the day of the hearing. Hence the delay in a decision.


The Judge although appearing not to have studied her papers had an in depth knowledge of her papers.


----------



## Khonsu (May 20, 2009)

Everything is duly crossed :notworthy:


----------



## ian14 (Jan 2, 2008)

The FBH lost.


----------



## Malc (Oct 27, 2009)

ian14 said:


> The FBH lost.


Seriously ?


----------



## Malc (Oct 27, 2009)

Ok sorry to be three weeks behind on this !

But in laymans terms what / how does this impact the hobby. It seems to me that other than make a ruling as to if the cancellation was in favour of the council, the judge sat on the fence on the other issues raised by the ainti pet keeping brigade ?

I thought the reason behing the review was to get a legal standing regarding the running of reptile shows one way or another ? - or did I miss something ?


----------



## colinm (Sep 20, 2008)

It doesn't make any difference at all.

The judge ruled that that the council didn't stop the event the racecourse owners did and that there was the possibility of illegal activity taking place.

She declined to rule on the important point of Section 2 of the Pet Animals Act which would have had a big impact one way or another on breeders meetings.


----------

