I have been and remain extremely busy, but thankfully there has been nothing of significance to post about. I’m toying with a summary of the fascinating and now very, very lengthy comment thread on the Malcolm post, but that too will have to wait.
While I am here, may I just say that probably the last place I anticipated jaw-dropping procedural topsy-turvydom in a hearing was the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal. A long story that I can’t actually tell here, but damn, that was like Alice in tribunal-land. Or I am being naive?
I also have been too busy to give Malcolm my full attention, for it’s almost as important to employment as it is to housing. Sixty-page House of Lords judgments are tough stuff for the spare time however…
Well, procedural topsy-turveydom in an LVT does not surprise me very much I’m afraid. I remember brainstorming the rules when they came out and trying to anticipate any problems that might arise (I was briefly doing a summer job in the tribunal at the time). I’ve certainly encountered some interesting situations.
procedural topsy-turveydom is the norm for the LVT… and if (or is that when?) the LVT becomes the housing court, everyone will come to realise this
I swear they were making it up as they went along. It had everything from advocates giving evidence in the middle of crossing a witness to demands for the production of documents that just happened to be privileged. And all that was just for an amuse-bouche.
Did they at least serve some nice wine with them?? lol
@Ethan: You have no idea how fervently I wished they did.