Tweet
Isn’t this complexity or fragility of the legal system? For each and every argument there is an opposing argument, therefore at best you can only hope that the judge finds in your favour and he/she is human also and will formulate their own opinion/judgement, based upon what has been presented before them, to their own best understanding for no one is all knowing of everything. This leads to many interpretations of the same article?
And whilst it is also true that solicitors can counter with an appeal etc there is no guarantee of success, and what we have to consider is yes whilst it is their job to argue it is not them that pay for it, this burden falls upon the shoulder of the Client that fails, whilst many companies can stand a few grand here and there in legal fees it’s the ordinary person that may not, this therefore is probably the biggest uncertainty and concern for the ordinary person taking a case through court. A poor result first time could cost them dear for a very long time and I should know.
So whilst I acknowledge the enthusiasm of the solicitor to provide continued arguments I do sometimes wonder if there is an easier solution for the client? Perhaps that’s why the AAD approach of getting to SB is in the best interest of the ordinary person, less stress and anxiety compared to legal system?
From my limited knowledge of the legal system looking in from outside, if you will, it appears that law is not an absolute and is often no more than an interpretation, which given we are supposed to live according to the law how can that be possible?
Imo, the legal system will never be balanced until somebody takes responsibility for it and clearly defines it, more often than not it is the innocent that get penalised as a result of it?
And whilst it is also true that solicitors can counter with an appeal etc there is no guarantee of success, and what we have to consider is yes whilst it is their job to argue it is not them that pay for it, this burden falls upon the shoulder of the Client that fails, whilst many companies can stand a few grand here and there in legal fees it’s the ordinary person that may not, this therefore is probably the biggest uncertainty and concern for the ordinary person taking a case through court. A poor result first time could cost them dear for a very long time and I should know.
So whilst I acknowledge the enthusiasm of the solicitor to provide continued arguments I do sometimes wonder if there is an easier solution for the client? Perhaps that’s why the AAD approach of getting to SB is in the best interest of the ordinary person, less stress and anxiety compared to legal system?
From my limited knowledge of the legal system looking in from outside, if you will, it appears that law is not an absolute and is often no more than an interpretation, which given we are supposed to live according to the law how can that be possible?
Imo, the legal system will never be balanced until somebody takes responsibility for it and clearly defines it, more often than not it is the innocent that get penalised as a result of it?
Comment