Court Injunction to ban members of RSPB et al from Heathrow
 

Michael Hoffman wrote:

Before MRS JUSTICE SWIFT
Wednesday 1st August, 2007
At 2 o'clock
UNROBED
APPLICATION NOTICES
IHQ/07/0616 Heathrow Airport Ltd & ors v Garman & ors
IHQ/07/0648 Same v Same

According to Indymedia, Mrs. Justice Swift happens to be a member of the
RSPB, and a benefactor of The Campaign for the Protection of Rural
England and The National Trust.

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/08/377488.html
--
Michael Hoffman

Court Injunction to ban members of RSPB et al from Heathrow
 

On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 21:08:49 +0100, Michael Hoffman
wrote:

Michael Hoffman wrote:

Before MRS JUSTICE SWIFT
Wednesday 1st August, 2007
At 2 o'clock
UNROBED
APPLICATION NOTICES
IHQ/07/0616 Heathrow Airport Ltd & ors v Garman & ors
IHQ/07/0648 Same v Same

According to Indymedia, Mrs. Justice Swift happens to be a member of the
RSPB, and a benefactor of The Campaign for the Protection of Rural
England and The National Trust.

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/08/377488.html

Thus meaning, no doubt, she will be required to step down due to COI.

Court Injunction to ban members of RSPB et al from Heathrow
 

James Farrar wrote:
On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 21:08:49 +0100, Michael Hoffman
wrote:

Michael Hoffman wrote:

Before MRS JUSTICE SWIFT
Wednesday 1st August, 2007
At 2 o'clock
UNROBED
APPLICATION NOTICES
IHQ/07/0616 Heathrow Airport Ltd & ors v Garman & ors
IHQ/07/0648 Same v Same
According to Indymedia, Mrs. Justice Swift happens to be a member of the
RSPB, and a benefactor of The Campaign for the Protection of Rural
England and The National Trust.

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/08/377488.html

Thus meaning, no doubt, she will be required to step down due to COI.

No, because BAA's lawyer said he did not object to her hearing the case.
They claim that they never meant to bring the injunction against
millions of people, only four. Well, that's what BAA is claiming anyway.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...port.activists
--
Michael Hoffman

Court Injunction to ban members of RSPB et al from Heathrow
 

Michael Hoffman wrote:

They claim that they never meant to bring the injunction against
millions of people, only four. Well, that's what BAA is claiming anyway.

Here's another story from The Independent
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/legal/article2826195.ece:

"""
Amid scenes of near farce at the Royal Courts of Justice, Justice
Caroline Swift, asked Timothy Lawson-Cruttenden, the lawyer representing
BAA's subsidiary, Heathrow Airport Limited, to clarify the terms of the
injunction he was seeking, stating: "I have to know what I am being
asked to do."...

Justice Swift said she was "frankly puzzled" and demanded a clear
explanation of BAA's intentions when the hearing continues today.
"""
--
Michael Hoffman