If you are calling on me to act as a Judge in a court of law (behave) then you both need to realise that as I set the laws on here, I judge them as they stand, and without appeal. If you are both calling on me to be the final arbiter in a dispute between you then that is a civil matter, an altogether different thing with a lower standard of proof. In law that standard is beyond reasonable doubt. In a civil matter it is the balance of probabilities. Is it more likely than one of you is correct and the other wrong?
I find that there are inconsistencies in the evidence given by both of you. When it comes to credibility I find that neither of you pass a standard that would be considered acceptable. Using Regina v the Wednesbury Corporation and asking would a reasonable man find either argument reasonable, the answer is a resounding no. I am therefore forced to conclude that I find in favour of neither of you. You will each pay court costs, suspended for 6 months if you stop shouting at me. As an additional penalty, neither of you are picking any fixtures. Understand?
I find that there are inconsistencies in the evidence given by both of you. When it comes to credibility I find that neither of you pass a standard that would be considered acceptable. Using Regina v the Wednesbury Corporation and asking would a reasonable man find either argument reasonable, the answer is a resounding no. I am therefore forced to conclude that I find in favour of neither of you. You will each pay court costs, suspended for 6 months if you stop shouting at me. As an additional penalty, neither of you are picking any fixtures. Understand?


Comment