TRY ME!
Witness Statement Formatting Guide
Summary
Proper formatting of legal documents is crucial for court impact. Ensure case names are italicized, maintain consistent formatting, and verify dates for accuracy. Each defendant should have a unique court case reference number, and demands alone do not constitute proof of debt. The distinction between dwelling and dwelling-house is important for property classification. The Single Justice Procedure is inappropriate for complex cases like council tax matters. Discrimination claims may arise under the Equality Act 2010 and Disability Discrimination Act 1995. Void orders are those made without jurisdiction or due process. Consider seeking legal advice for personalized guidance.Full Conversation
please rewrite in the correct format to help me get this right:
Certainly! Here is the revised response in the correct format:
---
---
Witness Statement Review
**Key Points:**
- Ensure all case names are italicized for proper legal citation.
- Maintain consistency in formatting (e.g., use of bold and italics).
- Double-check the dates for accuracy.
**Revised Excerpts:**
*. **R v. Birmingham Magistrates' Court ex parte Ahmed [*] EWHC Admin ***
*. **R v. Swindon Borough Council ex parte Roberts [*] EWHC Admin ***
*. **Steel v. NRAM Ltd [*] UKSC ***
*. **R (on the application of Wilson) v. Coventry City Council [*] EWHC * (Admin)**
*. **R (on the application of East Sussex County Council) v. Roberts [*] EWCA Civ ***
*. **R (on the application of Williams) v. Horsham District Council [*] EWHC * (Admin)**
*. **Uratemp Ventures Ltd v. Collins [*] UKHL ***
---
If you need further assistance, please let me know.
**Key Points:**
- Ensure all case names are italicized for proper legal citation.
- Maintain consistency in formatting (e.g., use of bold and italics).
- Double-check the dates for accuracy.
**Revised Excerpts:**
*. **R v. Birmingham Magistrates' Court ex parte Ahmed [*] EWHC Admin ***
*. **R v. Swindon Borough Council ex parte Roberts [*] EWHC Admin ***
*. **Steel v. NRAM Ltd [*] UKSC ***
*. **R (on the application of Wilson) v. Coventry City Council [*] EWHC * (Admin)**
*. **R (on the application of East Sussex County Council) v. Roberts [*] EWCA Civ ***
*. **R (on the application of Williams) v. Horsham District Council [*] EWHC * (Admin)**
*. **Uratemp Ventures Ltd v. Collins [*] UKHL ***
---
If you need further assistance, please let me know.
please rewrite this in the correct format: WITNESS STATEMENT
*. I am Gary John Taylor – MR GJ TAYLOR, [ADDRESS xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]the Defendant in this matter. I make this statement in support of my claim against The City of Doncaster Council and specifically against representatives Scot Robert Fawcus, Services Director - Legal and Democratic Services, Miss Emily Lewin, Assistant Director of Legal and Democratic Services, and Chief Executive Damian Francis Allen, in their personal capacity.
**Events and Personal Impact**
*. On * November *, I received notice of an interim charging order dated * October * issued by the council, based on a bulk list extract of liability enclosed in a letter dated * October * and received on * November *.
*. I oppose the Claimant's application for an unlawful interim charging order on my personal property where I reside. My property is legally defined as a Dwelling-House under Halsbury's Laws, not the broad term "dwelling" as used in the Local Government Finance Act *.
**Events and Personal Impact**
*. The case relies on the Single Justice Procedure and Bulk liability order extracts, with no lawful liability Court Orders or individual unique Court case reference numbers provided for the * defendants listed below. This lack of individual case numbers contravenes the principles established in **R v. Birmingham Magistrates' Court ex parte Ahmed [*] EWHC Admin ***, which mandates individual consideration and proper documentation for each case.
**Claimant's Evidence**
*. The Claimant's evidence includes an Order dated * July *, with a schedule of * defendants.
*. An order issued on * July * included * defendants.
*. An order issued on * July * included * defendants, but the actual order only showed *. The total number of defendants across *, *, and * amounts to *, all without unique individual Court Case reference numbers. This bulk processing approach violates the requirement for individual case assessment as highlighted in **R v. Swindon Borough Council ex parte Roberts [*] EWHC Admin ***.
- **Individual Consideration**:
The case emphasizes the necessity for each defendant to receive individual assessment and documentation.
- **Proper Documentation**: Each defendant should have a unique court case reference number for legal proceedings to be valid.
**Challenge to the Liability Order**
*. I have requested detailed evidence laid with the Magistrates Court from the Claimants to substantiate the debt claimed, which has not been provided satisfactorily. This lack of evidence contravenes the principles set out in **Steel v. NRAM Ltd [*] UKSC ***, wherein demands alone do not constitute definitive proof of debt.
*. The Claimant’s demands alone do not constitute definitive proof of debt as per the ruling in **Steel v. NRAM Ltd [*] UKSC ***.
**Property Classification and Reassessment Based on Case Law**
*. Key points distinguishing "dwelling" and "dwelling-house":
- **Dwelling**:
- Defined for council tax purposes as properties used or suitable for use as residences.
- Broad term encompassing any property that can be lived in.
- Governed by the Local Government Finance Act *.
- Supported by case law such as:
- **R (on the application of Wilson) v. Coventry City Council [*] EWHC * (Admin)**: Highlights the importance of considering a property's physical characteristics, current use, and suitability for residence.
- **R (on the application of East Sussex County Council) v. Roberts [*] EWCA Civ ***: Stresses the need to evaluate a property's actual use and suitability for habitation.
- **R (on the application of Williams) v. Horsham District Council [*] EWHC * (Admin)**: Emphasizes reassessment based on accurate property classification.
- **Dwelling-house**:
- Defined more specifically as a ‘home’ where one resides with all essential facilities for day-to-day living.
- Emphasizes specific use and facilities necessary for daily life.
- Supported by case law such as:
- **Uratemp Ventures Ltd v. Collins [*] UKHL ***: Clarifies the meaning of "dwelling-house" in the context of residential property, emphasizing the specific use and facilities necessary for day-to-day living.
These distinctions between a "dwelling" and a "dwelling-house" support the reassessment of property classification for council tax purposes, highlighting that my property should be evaluated under the more precise definition of "dwelling-house" as set out in the relevant case law and Halsbury's Laws of England.
**Legislative Framework**
*. I am a long-standing council tax payer who received a notice regarding unpaid council tax. Despite my debilitating disability causing mental disorders and financial difficulties, I have consistently paid arrears when possible and settled all previous years' council tax, albeit sometimes late due to my health challenges.
Doncaster Council has repeatedly ignored my documented health impairment conditions, denied and refused me financial assistance when requested, and imposed fines and additional costs whenever possible, further worsening my financial hardship and adversely affecting my mental health. Despite my repeated efforts to resolve these issues amicably over many years, as evidenced by Data Subject Access Requests (DSAR) and my correspondences, the Council has unfairly targeted me, adding unnecessary costs at every opportunity. Alan Stoves, Head of Revenues and Benefits, stated on * June *: “No further response will be given on these same issues” when I questioned the lawfulness of the liability orders and property classification.
**Improper Application of Single Justice Procedure (SJP) in Council Tax Cases**
*. **Single Justice Procedure (SJP)**:
- Designed for minor offences like traffic violations.
- Allows a single magistrate to handle cases without a court hearing.
- Its application in council tax matters is inappropriate due to the complexity of such cases.
**Relevant Case Law**:
- **R v. Birmingham Magistrates' Court ex parte Ahmed [*] EWHC Admin ***:
- Highlights the need for proper judicial consideration in council tax cases.
- Mandates that council tax matters should not be dealt with under SJP due to the complexity and necessity for judicial oversight.
Council tax matters are generally not minor offences and the SJP should not be applied unless explicitly allowed by law. The improper application of SJP in this context is supported by the following cases:
- **Northern Trains Ltd v. Mark Ballington & Jade Wylie [*] EWHC**
- **Northern Trains Ltd v. Sarah Cooke [*] EWHC**
- **Greater Anglian v. Joshua Baggaley, Paul Jenkins & Sarah McKenzie [*] EWHC**
These cases illustrate judicial precedents against the improper application of the Single Justice Procedure (SJP) in contexts that require more comprehensive judicial oversight:
- **Northern Trains Ltd v. Mark Ballington & Jade Wylie [*] EWHC**: Demonstrates the necessity for proper judicial consideration and argues against the use of SJP in complex cases.
- **Northern Trains Ltd v. Sarah Cooke [*] EWHC**: Supports the argument that SJP is inappropriate for matters requiring detailed examination.
- **Greater Anglian v. Joshua Baggaley, Paul Jenkins & Sarah McKenzie [*] EWHC**: Highlights the improper use of SJP where thorough judicial oversight is essential.
These cases collectively reinforce that council tax matters, given their complexity, should not be subjected to the SJP unless explicitly permitted by law.
**Legal Precedent**
*. **Lord Chief Justice Widgery’s Principles (*)** state that the issuance of a summons is a judicial act requiring proper oversight. Summonses issued without magistrate review are invalid, as supported by the rulings in **R v. Birmingham Magistrates' Court ex parte Ahmed [*] EWHC Admin *** and **Steel v. NRAM Ltd [*] UKSC ***.
**Human Rights Act ***
*. The actions of Doncaster Council may constitute potential breaches of my human rights, specifically the right to respect for private and family life as outlined in Article * of the Human Rights Act *.
**Disability Discrimination Act ***
*. Doncaster Council's actions may constitute discrimination due to my health conditions.
**Equality Act ***
*. **Direct Discrimination**: Doncaster Council has frequently disregarded my documented health conditions, denied me financial assistance, and imposed fines and additional costs at every opportunity.
*. **Indirect Discrimination**: By imposing fines and additional costs, the Council has applied a policy that disproportionately affects individuals with disabilities.
*. **Failure to Make Reasonable Adjustments**: Despite my disability and significant health issues causing financial difficulties, I have consistently paid arrears when possible. The Council has not adjusted their approach or offered aid to accommodate my health issues and financial difficulties.
*. **Harassment**: Despite my repeated efforts to resolve these issues amicably, the Council has unfairly targeted me by adding unnecessary costs at every opportunity over the years, creating an intimidating and hostile environment.
**Void Orders**
*. According to **Shirley Lewald**, a Solicitor Advocate with Higher Rights (Civil and Criminal Courts), an 'ORDER' in court is void if made without jurisdiction, breaks the law, or ignores due process. Anything done after such an ultra vires act is void ab initio, meaning it didn't happen. This principle is supported by various case laws:
- **Anlaby v. Praetorius (*)**: A plaintiff has no right to obtain any judgment at all if the proceedings are void.
- **Crane v. Director of Public Prosecutions [*]**: If an order is void ab initio, there is no real order of the Court.
- **Craig v. Kanssen [*]**: An order which can properly be described as a nullity is something which the person affected by it is entitled ex debito justitiae to have set aside.
- **MacFoy v. United Africa Co. Ltd. [*]**: A void order is incurably void and all proceedings based on the invalid claim or void act are also void.
**Potential Damages and Remedies**
*. I seek the following remedies and compensation
continue from *
**Potential Damages and Remedies**
*. I seek the following remedies and compensation for the damages caused by the actions of the City of Doncaster Council and its representatives, in their personal capacity:
- Compensation for financial losses incurred due to fines and additional costs, estimated at £*,*.
- Compensation for emotional distress and mental health impact, estimated at £*,*, taking into account the prolonged nature of the distress caused.
- Reimbursement of legal costs incurred due to defending against the interim charging order, estimated at £*,*.
- Full reimbursement of all council tax payments made under the incorrect classification of my property, estimated from May * to *, estimated but to be confirmed by the council at £*,*.
**References to Case Law and Statutory Provisions**
*. The council's actions contravene the principles established in **Steel v. NRAM Ltd [*] UKSC *** and the procedural requirements outlined in the **Local Government Finance Act ***.
*. Their failure to consider my health conditions and financial difficulties breaches the **Equality Act *** and the **Disability Discrimination Act ***.
**References to Case Law and Statutory Provisions**
*. The improper application of the Single Justice Procedure is highlighted in the cases of **Northern Trains Ltd v. Mark Ballington & Jade Wylie [*] EWHC**, **Northern Trains Ltd v. Sarah Cooke [*] EWHC**, and **Greater Anglian v. Joshua Baggaley, Paul Jenkins & Sarah McKenzie [*] EWHC**.
**Conclusion**
*. Based on the procedural improprieties, discriminatory actions, and the improper application of the Single Justice Procedure, I respectfully request that the court:
- Dismiss the application for an interim charging order.
- Award compensation for financial losses, emotional distress, and legal costs as detailed above.
- Consider the legal precedents and the evidence provided in support of my claims.
**Statement of Truth**
I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true.
Signed: Date: * November *
Certainly! Below is your revised witness statement with the correct formatting for legal citations and text:
---
**WITNESS STATEMENT**
*. I am Gary John Taylor – MR GJ TAYLOR, [ADDRESS xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] the Defendant in this matter. I make this statement in support of my claim against The City of Doncaster Council and specifically against representatives Scot Robert Fawcus, Services Director - Legal and Democratic Services, Miss Emily Lewin, Assistant Director of Legal and Democratic Services, and Chief Executive Damian Francis Allen, in their personal capacity.
**Events and Personal Impact**
*. On * November *, I received notice of an interim charging order dated * October * issued by the council, based on a bulk list extract of liability enclosed in a letter dated * October * and received on * November *.
*. I oppose the Claimant's application for an unlawful interim charging order on my personal property where I reside. My property is legally defined as a Dwelling-House under Halsbury's Laws, not the broad term "dwelling" as used in the Local Government Finance Act *.
**Events and Personal Impact**
*. The case relies on the Single Justice Procedure and
---
**WITNESS STATEMENT**
*. I am Gary John Taylor – MR GJ TAYLOR, [ADDRESS xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] the Defendant in this matter. I make this statement in support of my claim against The City of Doncaster Council and specifically against representatives Scot Robert Fawcus, Services Director - Legal and Democratic Services, Miss Emily Lewin, Assistant Director of Legal and Democratic Services, and Chief Executive Damian Francis Allen, in their personal capacity.
**Events and Personal Impact**
*. On * November *, I received notice of an interim charging order dated * October * issued by the council, based on a bulk list extract of liability enclosed in a letter dated * October * and received on * November *.
*. I oppose the Claimant's application for an unlawful interim charging order on my personal property where I reside. My property is legally defined as a Dwelling-House under Halsbury's Laws, not the broad term "dwelling" as used in the Local Government Finance Act *.
**Events and Personal Impact**
*. The case relies on the Single Justice Procedure and
carry on from: *.
**Events and Personal Impact**
*. The case relies on the Single Justice Procedure and Bulk liability order extracts, with no lawful liability Court Orders or individual unique Court case reference numbers provided for the * defendants listed below. This lack of individual case numbers contravenes the principles established in *R v. Birmingham Magistrates' Court ex parte Ahmed [*] EWHC Admin **, which mandates individual consideration and proper documentation for each case.
**Claimant's Evidence**
*. The Claimant's evidence includes an Order dated * July *, with a schedule of * defendants.
*. An order issued on * July * included * defendants.
*. An order issued on * July * included * defendants, but the actual order only showed *. The total number of defendants across *, *, and * amounts to *, all without unique individual Court Case reference numbers. This bulk processing approach violates the requirement for individual case assessment as highlighted in *R v. Swindon Borough Council ex parte Roberts [*] EWHC Admin **.
**Individual Consideration**:
- The case emphasizes the necessity for
*. The case relies on the Single Justice Procedure and Bulk liability order extracts, with no lawful liability Court Orders or individual unique Court case reference numbers provided for the * defendants listed below. This lack of individual case numbers contravenes the principles established in *R v. Birmingham Magistrates' Court ex parte Ahmed [*] EWHC Admin **, which mandates individual consideration and proper documentation for each case.
**Claimant's Evidence**
*. The Claimant's evidence includes an Order dated * July *, with a schedule of * defendants.
*. An order issued on * July * included * defendants.
*. An order issued on * July * included * defendants, but the actual order only showed *. The total number of defendants across *, *, and * amounts to *, all without unique individual Court Case reference numbers. This bulk processing approach violates the requirement for individual case assessment as highlighted in *R v. Swindon Borough Council ex parte Roberts [*] EWHC Admin **.
**Individual Consideration**:
- The case emphasizes the necessity for
carry on from: *
**Individual Consideration**:
- The case emphasizes the necessity for each defendant to receive individual assessment and documentation.
- Proper Documentation: Each defendant should have a unique court case reference number for legal proceedings to be valid.
**Challenge to the Liability Order**
*. I have requested detailed evidence laid with the Magistrates Court from the Claimants to substantiate the debt claimed, which has not been provided satisfactorily. This lack of evidence contravenes the principles set out in *Steel v. NRAM Ltd [*] UKSC **, wherein demands alone do not constitute definitive proof of debt.
*. The Claimant’s demands alone do not constitute definitive proof of debt as per the ruling in *Steel v. NRAM Ltd [*] UKSC **.
**Property Classification and Reassessment Based on Case Law**
*. Key points distinguishing "dwelling" and "dwelling-house":
- **Dwelling**:
- Defined for council tax purposes as properties used or suitable for use as residences.
- Broad term encompassing any property that can be lived in.
- Governed by the Local Government Finance Act *.
- Supported by case law such as:
- *R (on the application of Wilson) v
- The case emphasizes the necessity for each defendant to receive individual assessment and documentation.
- Proper Documentation: Each defendant should have a unique court case reference number for legal proceedings to be valid.
**Challenge to the Liability Order**
*. I have requested detailed evidence laid with the Magistrates Court from the Claimants to substantiate the debt claimed, which has not been provided satisfactorily. This lack of evidence contravenes the principles set out in *Steel v. NRAM Ltd [*] UKSC **, wherein demands alone do not constitute definitive proof of debt.
*. The Claimant’s demands alone do not constitute definitive proof of debt as per the ruling in *Steel v. NRAM Ltd [*] UKSC **.
**Property Classification and Reassessment Based on Case Law**
*. Key points distinguishing "dwelling" and "dwelling-house":
- **Dwelling**:
- Defined for council tax purposes as properties used or suitable for use as residences.
- Broad term encompassing any property that can be lived in.
- Governed by the Local Government Finance Act *.
- Supported by case law such as:
- *R (on the application of Wilson) v
carry on from: *
*. Key points distinguishing "dwelling" and "dwelling-house":
- **Dwelling**:
- Defined for council tax purposes as properties used or suitable for use as residences.
- Broad term encompassing any property that can be lived in.
- Governed by the Local Government Finance Act *.
- Supported by case law such as:
- *R (on the application of Wilson) v. Coventry City Council [*] EWHC * (Admin)*: Highlights the importance of considering a property's physical characteristics, current use, and suitability for residence.
- *R (on the application of East Sussex County Council) v. Roberts [*] EWCA Civ **: Stresses the need to evaluate a property's actual use and suitability for habitation.
- *R (on the application of Williams) v. Horsham District Council [*] EWHC * (Admin)*: Emphasizes reassessment based on accurate property classification.
- **Dwelling-house**:
- Defined more specifically as a ‘home’ where one resides with all essential facilities for day-to-day living.
- Emphasizes specific use and facilities necessary
- **Dwelling**:
- Defined for council tax purposes as properties used or suitable for use as residences.
- Broad term encompassing any property that can be lived in.
- Governed by the Local Government Finance Act *.
- Supported by case law such as:
- *R (on the application of Wilson) v. Coventry City Council [*] EWHC * (Admin)*: Highlights the importance of considering a property's physical characteristics, current use, and suitability for residence.
- *R (on the application of East Sussex County Council) v. Roberts [*] EWCA Civ **: Stresses the need to evaluate a property's actual use and suitability for habitation.
- *R (on the application of Williams) v. Horsham District Council [*] EWHC * (Admin)*: Emphasizes reassessment based on accurate property classification.
- **Dwelling-house**:
- Defined more specifically as a ‘home’ where one resides with all essential facilities for day-to-day living.
- Emphasizes specific use and facilities necessary
carry on from: *
for daily life.
- Supported by case law such as:
- *Uratemp Ventures Ltd v. Collins [*] UKHL **: Clarifies the meaning of "dwelling-house" in the context of residential property, emphasizing the specific use and facilities necessary for day-to-day living.
These distinctions between a "dwelling" and a "dwelling-house" support the reassessment of property classification for council tax purposes, highlighting that my property should be evaluated under the more precise definition of "dwelling-house" as set out in the relevant case law and Halsbury's Laws of England.
**Legislative Framework**
*. I am a long-standing council tax payer who received a notice regarding unpaid council tax. Despite my debilitating disability causing mental disorders and financial difficulties, I have consistently paid arrears when possible and settled all previous years' council tax, albeit sometimes late due to my health challenges.
Doncaster Council has repeatedly ignored my documented health impairment conditions, denied and refused me financial assistance when requested, and imposed fines and additional costs whenever possible, further worsening my financial hardship and adversely affecting my mental health. Despite my repeated efforts to resolve these issues amicably over many years, as evidenced by Data Subject Access Requests (
- Supported by case law such as:
- *Uratemp Ventures Ltd v. Collins [*] UKHL **: Clarifies the meaning of "dwelling-house" in the context of residential property, emphasizing the specific use and facilities necessary for day-to-day living.
These distinctions between a "dwelling" and a "dwelling-house" support the reassessment of property classification for council tax purposes, highlighting that my property should be evaluated under the more precise definition of "dwelling-house" as set out in the relevant case law and Halsbury's Laws of England.
**Legislative Framework**
*. I am a long-standing council tax payer who received a notice regarding unpaid council tax. Despite my debilitating disability causing mental disorders and financial difficulties, I have consistently paid arrears when possible and settled all previous years' council tax, albeit sometimes late due to my health challenges.
Doncaster Council has repeatedly ignored my documented health impairment conditions, denied and refused me financial assistance when requested, and imposed fines and additional costs whenever possible, further worsening my financial hardship and adversely affecting my mental health. Despite my repeated efforts to resolve these issues amicably over many years, as evidenced by Data Subject Access Requests (
carry on from: *
**Legislative Framework**
*. I am a long-standing council tax payer who received a notice regarding unpaid council tax. Despite my debilitating disability causing mental disorders and financial difficulties, I have consistently paid arrears when possible and settled all previous years' council tax, albeit sometimes late due to my health challenges.
Doncaster Council has repeatedly ignored my documented health impairment conditions, denied and refused me financial assistance when requested, and imposed fines and additional costs whenever possible, further worsening my financial hardship and adversely affecting my mental health. Despite my repeated efforts to resolve these issues amicably over many years, as evidenced by Data Subject Access Requests (DSAR) and my correspondences, the Council has unfairly targeted me, adding unnecessary costs at every opportunity. Alan Stoves, Head of Revenues and Benefits, stated on * June *: “No further response will be given on these same issues” when I questioned the lawfulness of the liability orders and property classification.
**Improper Application of Single Justice Procedure (SJP) in Council Tax Cases**
*. **Single Justice Procedure (SJP)**:
- Designed for minor offences like traffic violations.
- Allows a single magistrate to handle cases without a court hearing.
- Its application
*. I am a long-standing council tax payer who received a notice regarding unpaid council tax. Despite my debilitating disability causing mental disorders and financial difficulties, I have consistently paid arrears when possible and settled all previous years' council tax, albeit sometimes late due to my health challenges.
Doncaster Council has repeatedly ignored my documented health impairment conditions, denied and refused me financial assistance when requested, and imposed fines and additional costs whenever possible, further worsening my financial hardship and adversely affecting my mental health. Despite my repeated efforts to resolve these issues amicably over many years, as evidenced by Data Subject Access Requests (DSAR) and my correspondences, the Council has unfairly targeted me, adding unnecessary costs at every opportunity. Alan Stoves, Head of Revenues and Benefits, stated on * June *: “No further response will be given on these same issues” when I questioned the lawfulness of the liability orders and property classification.
**Improper Application of Single Justice Procedure (SJP) in Council Tax Cases**
*. **Single Justice Procedure (SJP)**:
- Designed for minor offences like traffic violations.
- Allows a single magistrate to handle cases without a court hearing.
- Its application
carry on from: *.
in council tax matters is inappropriate due to the complexity of such cases.
**Relevant Case Law**:
- *R v. Birmingham Magistrates' Court ex parte Ahmed [*] EWHC Admin **:
- Highlights the need for proper judicial consideration in council tax cases.
- Mandates that council tax matters should not be dealt with under SJP due to the complexity and necessity for judicial oversight.
**Legal Precedent**:
*. **Lord Chief Justice Widgery’s Principles (*)** state that the issuance of a summons is a judicial act requiring proper oversight. Summonses issued without magistrate review are invalid, as supported by the rulings in *R v. Birmingham Magistrates' Court ex parte Ahmed [*] EWHC Admin ** and *Steel v. NRAM Ltd [*] UKSC **.
**Human Rights Act ***:
*. The actions of Doncaster Council may constitute potential breaches of my human rights, specifically the right to respect for private and family life as outlined in Article * of the Human Rights Act *.
**Disability Discrimination Act ***:
*. Doncaster Council
**Relevant Case Law**:
- *R v. Birmingham Magistrates' Court ex parte Ahmed [*] EWHC Admin **:
- Highlights the need for proper judicial consideration in council tax cases.
- Mandates that council tax matters should not be dealt with under SJP due to the complexity and necessity for judicial oversight.
**Legal Precedent**:
*. **Lord Chief Justice Widgery’s Principles (*)** state that the issuance of a summons is a judicial act requiring proper oversight. Summonses issued without magistrate review are invalid, as supported by the rulings in *R v. Birmingham Magistrates' Court ex parte Ahmed [*] EWHC Admin ** and *Steel v. NRAM Ltd [*] UKSC **.
**Human Rights Act ***:
*. The actions of Doncaster Council may constitute potential breaches of my human rights, specifically the right to respect for private and family life as outlined in Article * of the Human Rights Act *.
**Disability Discrimination Act ***:
*. Doncaster Council
carry on from: *.
**Disability Discrimination Act ***:
*. Doncaster Council's actions may constitute discrimination due to my health conditions.
**Equality Act ***:
*. **Direct Discrimination**: Doncaster Council has frequently disregarded my documented health conditions, denied me financial assistance, and imposed fines and additional costs at every opportunity.
*. **Indirect Discrimination**: By imposing fines and additional costs, the Council has applied a policy that disproportionately affects individuals with disabilities.
*. **Failure to Make Reasonable Adjustments**: Despite my disability and significant health issues causing financial difficulties, I have consistently paid arrears when possible. The Council has not adjusted their approach or offered aid to accommodate my health issues and financial difficulties.
*. **Harassment**: Despite my repeated efforts to resolve these issues amicably, the Council has unfairly targeted me by adding unnecessary costs at every opportunity over the years, creating an intimidating and hostile environment.
**Void Orders**:
*. According to **Shirley Lewald**, a Solicitor Advocate with Higher Rights (Civil and Criminal Courts), an 'ORDER' in court is void if made without jurisdiction, breaks the law, or ignores due process. Anything done after such an
*. Doncaster Council's actions may constitute discrimination due to my health conditions.
**Equality Act ***:
*. **Direct Discrimination**: Doncaster Council has frequently disregarded my documented health conditions, denied me financial assistance, and imposed fines and additional costs at every opportunity.
*. **Indirect Discrimination**: By imposing fines and additional costs, the Council has applied a policy that disproportionately affects individuals with disabilities.
*. **Failure to Make Reasonable Adjustments**: Despite my disability and significant health issues causing financial difficulties, I have consistently paid arrears when possible. The Council has not adjusted their approach or offered aid to accommodate my health issues and financial difficulties.
*. **Harassment**: Despite my repeated efforts to resolve these issues amicably, the Council has unfairly targeted me by adding unnecessary costs at every opportunity over the years, creating an intimidating and hostile environment.
**Void Orders**:
*. According to **Shirley Lewald**, a Solicitor Advocate with Higher Rights (Civil and Criminal Courts), an 'ORDER' in court is void if made without jurisdiction, breaks the law, or ignores due process. Anything done after such an
carry on from: *.
**Void Orders**
*. According to *Shirley Lewald*, a Solicitor Advocate with Higher Rights (Civil and Criminal Courts), an 'ORDER' in court is void if made without jurisdiction, breaks the law, or ignores due process. Anything done after such an ultra vires act is void ab initio, meaning it didn't happen. This principle is supported by various case laws:
- *Anlaby v. Praetorius (*)*: A plaintiff has no right to obtain any judgment at all if the proceedings are void.
- *Crane v. Director of Public Prosecutions [*]*: If an order is void ab initio, there is no real order of the Court.
- *Craig v. Kanssen [*]*: An order which can properly be described as a nullity is something which the person affected by it is entitled ex debito justitiae to have set aside.
- *MacFoy v. United Africa Co. Ltd. [*]*: A void order is incurably void and all proceedings based on the invalid claim or void act are also void.
**Potential Damages and Remedies**
*. I seek the following remedies and compensation for the damages caused
*. According to *Shirley Lewald*, a Solicitor Advocate with Higher Rights (Civil and Criminal Courts), an 'ORDER' in court is void if made without jurisdiction, breaks the law, or ignores due process. Anything done after such an ultra vires act is void ab initio, meaning it didn't happen. This principle is supported by various case laws:
- *Anlaby v. Praetorius (*)*: A plaintiff has no right to obtain any judgment at all if the proceedings are void.
- *Crane v. Director of Public Prosecutions [*]*: If an order is void ab initio, there is no real order of the Court.
- *Craig v. Kanssen [*]*: An order which can properly be described as a nullity is something which the person affected by it is entitled ex debito justitiae to have set aside.
- *MacFoy v. United Africa Co. Ltd. [*]*: A void order is incurably void and all proceedings based on the invalid claim or void act are also void.
**Potential Damages and Remedies**
*. I seek the following remedies and compensation for the damages caused
carry on from: *.
**Potential Damages and Remedies**
*. I seek the following remedies and compensation for the damages caused by the actions of the City of Doncaster Council and its representatives, in their personal capacity:
- Compensation for financial losses incurred due to fines and additional costs, estimated at £*,*.
- Compensation for emotional distress and mental health impact, estimated at £*,*, taking into account the prolonged nature of the distress caused.
- Reimbursement of legal costs incurred due to defending against the interim charging order, estimated at £*,*.
- Full reimbursement of all council tax payments made under the incorrect classification of my property, estimated from May * to *, estimated but to be confirmed by the council at £*,*.
**References to Case Law and Statutory Provisions**
*. The council's actions contravene the principles established in *Steel v. NRAM Ltd [*] UKSC ** and the procedural requirements outlined in the *Local Government Finance Act **.
*. Their failure to consider my health conditions and financial difficulties breaches the *Equality Act ** and the *Disability Discrimination Act **.
**Improper Application of Single Justice Procedure**
*. I seek the following remedies and compensation for the damages caused by the actions of the City of Doncaster Council and its representatives, in their personal capacity:
- Compensation for financial losses incurred due to fines and additional costs, estimated at £*,*.
- Compensation for emotional distress and mental health impact, estimated at £*,*, taking into account the prolonged nature of the distress caused.
- Reimbursement of legal costs incurred due to defending against the interim charging order, estimated at £*,*.
- Full reimbursement of all council tax payments made under the incorrect classification of my property, estimated from May * to *, estimated but to be confirmed by the council at £*,*.
**References to Case Law and Statutory Provisions**
*. The council's actions contravene the principles established in *Steel v. NRAM Ltd [*] UKSC ** and the procedural requirements outlined in the *Local Government Finance Act **.
*. Their failure to consider my health conditions and financial difficulties breaches the *Equality Act ** and the *Disability Discrimination Act **.
**Improper Application of Single Justice Procedure**
carry on from: *.
**Improper Application of Single Justice Procedure**
*. The improper application of the Single Justice Procedure is highlighted in the cases of *Northern Trains Ltd v. Mark Ballington & Jade Wylie [*] EWHC*, *Northern Trains Ltd v. Sarah Cooke [*] EWHC*, and *Greater Anglian v. Joshua Baggaley, Paul Jenkins & Sarah McKenzie [*] EWHC*.
**Conclusion**
*. Based on the procedural improprieties, discriminatory actions, and the improper application of the Single Justice Procedure, I respectfully request that the court:
- Dismiss the application for an interim charging order.
- Award compensation for financial losses, emotional distress, and legal costs as detailed above.
- Consider the legal precedents and the evidence provided in support of my claims.
**Statement of Truth**
I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true.
Signed: __________________
Date: * November *
*. The improper application of the Single Justice Procedure is highlighted in the cases of *Northern Trains Ltd v. Mark Ballington & Jade Wylie [*] EWHC*, *Northern Trains Ltd v. Sarah Cooke [*] EWHC*, and *Greater Anglian v. Joshua Baggaley, Paul Jenkins & Sarah McKenzie [*] EWHC*.
**Conclusion**
*. Based on the procedural improprieties, discriminatory actions, and the improper application of the Single Justice Procedure, I respectfully request that the court:
- Dismiss the application for an interim charging order.
- Award compensation for financial losses, emotional distress, and legal costs as detailed above.
- Consider the legal precedents and the evidence provided in support of my claims.
**Statement of Truth**
I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true.
Signed: __________________
Date: * November *
Start a new chat