JUDICIAL ABUSE IN THE UK

This blog and protest site is aimed at the British Judiciary. I explain my appalling experience and the disgraceful conduct of two Judges who serve at Bristol County Court - District Judge Louise O'Neill and His Honour Judge Ralton.

Judges have a duty to uphold the Law and act impartially in the interests of justice. I can say with certainty I was subject to unlawful dismissal of my claim, bias and deliberate intent to deny me justice. I protest that these two Judges breached their judicial oath and are not fit to serve, and for their removal from Public Office.

District Judge O'Neill wrongly dismissed my Negligence claim, then His Honour Judge Ralton refused permission to Appeal. Once a Judge refuses permission there is no further right to appeal because the Justice system considers your case was properly considered by two Honest Judges.

But what if you come across two dishonest or biased Judges. What is your legal redress ? The answer is not much. Judges have immunity from Misfeasance in Public Office. A claim under ECHR article 6 - Right to a fair Hearing would be the best route, but can only be done by Appeal or Judicial Review - which in my case were both wrongly refused.

The details of my claim and the disgraceful abuse are set out below in sections 'My Claim' and 'Case for Injustice and abuse'.

This site isn't about disliking decisions or Judicial error but about deliberate intent to deny justice and inflict harm.

I was a victim of Judge O'Neill and Ralton's unlawful, perverse and malicious decisions to dismiss a perfectly valid claim, refusal to allow an appeal, which any Judge acting properly would have allowed, and excessive cost order which pushed me to the brink of bankruptcy.

The level of injustice is beyond compare. Bristol County Court even trumped up a criminal charge against me following my complaint in a phone call. I was unnecessarily dragged through the Court process, and cleared with no case to answer. You really could not believe such abuse and lawlessness could occur in the British Courts.

The UK prides itself on our 'fair' Judicial system, and we complain about the conduct and Human Rights violations committed abroad, in our news. Maybe we need to look at how abusive our own Judicial system is. I protest as a victim of fraud and tell my story of judicial abuse.

Case For Human Rights Abuse

Article 6 - Everyone has a right to a fair

Hearing by an impartial Tribunal.

I was subject to three unfair Hearings conducted by Judges whose

conduct (regardless of intent), amounted to substantial prejudice,

unlawful dismissal of my claim, excessive costs and denial of a fair

Hearing and Justice. In other words a non impartial tribunal.

The first Hearing was misconducted and Unlawful. DJ O'Neill was not neutral on the underlying claim required for a fair Hearing, performed the wrong legal tests and acted as the party in the under-lying claim aiming to dismiss arguments in a Hearing she should not even have considered them, then used her invalid findings to dismiss my negligence claim. In other words she made sure I could not succeed. Neither my evidence nor submissions on Law were read or understood or properly considered. She ignored the fact the Defendant failed to dismiss my particulars and accepted their false statements without question, repeating them to dismiss my claim.

The Appeal Court Judge (HHJ Ralton) conducted an unfair Hearing where the CPR rules were not followed. He ignored my Grounds for appeal, and instead issued substantial falsehoods on facts and Law in his Judgment to refuse permission to Appeal, then issued an obviously invalid statement on Law to refuse permission. His reasons were invalid in fact and Law and unjust.

In both Hearings, all my written and verbal submissions and Appeal Grounds were ignored, as was appropriate Law on two Torts and Summary Judgment.

Both Judges were substantially wrong in Law, and far exceeded their remit and even took the position of the Defendant to introduce false arguments in Law to dismiss my claim.

The third (Costs) Hearing was conducted in a manner that prejudiced me in the fact that District Judge O'Neill was factually disqualified by conflict of interests reasons, then ignored all my submissions, and allowed costs against me, that I neither caused or incurred to stand. This resulted in a ridiculously excessive and unjust cost award.

Fact - regardless of Judicial intent, I did not receive fair Hearings. Any Hearing that ignored a party's submissions and case Law and where a party was fundamentally prejudiced, cannot be impartial (regardless of intent).

The three Hearings were a clear Breach of Article 6 European Convention of Human Rights - Right to a Fair Hearing from an impartial tribunal.

But it goes much further when you consider bias, improper intent and malice. The hearings were conducted by two non-impartial and biased Judges, who acted with deliberate intent to deny me justice, by making unlawful and perverse decisions to obtain the result they wanted - dismissal of my claim and highest cost order possible to inflict harm.

DJ O'Neill was openly biased. Her prejudice and statements easily prove this. HHJ Ralton knew and ignored it, so was complicit in the lower Court bias.

Both Judges were prepared to deliberately misconduct the Hearing, ignore the CPR rules, ignore the Law, and ignore all my submissions, to dismiss the claim.

HHJ Ralton deliberately ignored my grounds for appeal and substantially lied on material matters. Unbelievably both Judges even went as far as introducing false legal arguments on the Defendant's behalf to dismiss my claim. In other words both judges improperly acted for the Defendant, proving bias. They also accepted the Defendant's false statements to dismiss my claim and all the Defendant's costs, regardless of whether caused or incurred, in order to give me the maximum cost order possible.

Blocked. You can only bring proceedings under ECHR article 6 by way of Appeal (which I requested but HHJ Ralton ignored when he dismissed nine of my ten grounds with one false statement) or Judicial Review (which I did, but the Review Court dismissed my request with a false statement, saying that my grounds for appeal were considered by HHJ Ralton!!!!). In other words, I was blocked by two false statements. You couldn't make it up ! However, brought within one year and dismissed by false statements, I say invalidates these judgments.

Case for Human Rights Abuse

Case for Misfeasance in Public Office

Judges O'Neill and Ralton abused their positions to act impartially

and uphold the rule of Law. They made decisions not on Law or

interests of Justice, but on who they wanted to succeed. They acted

with intent to dismiss my claim, deny me justice and inflict harm.

Both ignored my case and submissions on Law. Both introduced false arguments to dismiss my claim on behalf of the Defendant. Ralton knew my claim was wrongly dismissed and told why. He ignored my Appeal and lied to uphold the decision to dismiss my claim. Both Judges abused their positions in public Office. Acts of deliberate injustice and improper intent are acts of bad faith and can be argued as Misfeasance in Public Office.

Case for District Judge O'Neill - abuse of position.

Case for His Honour Judge Ralton - abuse of position and Misfeasance in Public Office.

Bringing the British Legal Justice System into disrepute

Judges have a duty to act impartially and uphold the rule

of Law. The Judicial code of conduct requires Judicial independence, Impartiality and Integrity. Judges swear an oath to that effect. Without impartiality you don't have a Justice system.

I don't see how Judges who ignore submissions, ignore case Law, introduce false arguments for a party to dismiss a claim or blatantly lie to justify their decisions,

conforms to this oath. A Biased Judge cannot be trusted and brings into question their impartiality in past decisions. I believe these Judges have brought the British Legal system into disrepute, and are not fit to serve in Public Office.

Facts which undermine the British Legal Justice System

Case For Crime

I believe I was the victim of crime. Judges O'Neill and Ralton acted outside the interests of justice.Their actions amounted to a deliberate fraud against me as much as anyone removing money from my bank account. Improper intent to deny justice is crime and I believe there are proper grounds to prosecute them for criminal charges - Misconduct in Public Office and/or Fraud.

Warning to the Public

I warn anyone considering using the Civil Courts to consider carefully that they may likely encounter bias and decisions based on who the Judges want to win.

In particular I would warn anyone using Bristol County Court or coming across Ralton and O'Neill to be very careful.

Bristol County Court

MY CLAIM

My Loss of Chance Negligence claim was made out and obviously arguable so could not be dismissed by summary judgment for no prospect of success. In 2011, Counsel had failed to submit evidence I informed him of in a past malicious prosecution claim, despite knowing the CPS had applied to dismiss this claim for no evidence. It was then dismissed for no evidence. Evidence is necessary in the tort of Malicious Prosecution. Foreseeability and Causation were held. Counsel's failure to submit this left a defective claim before the Court, so caused loss of chance to argue it (loss of a legal right), and dismissal of my claim without chance of appeal. The non submitted evidence was real, had high chance of success and effectively proved malicious prosecution.

To succeed in Loss of chance Negligence, requires to show chance of a better outcome. Obviously evidence was better than no evidence and would have defeated the CPS case law used to dismiss the claim in 2011. The Defendant's application for Summary Judgment didn't dismiss my particulars as false or fictional and was flawed in Law (arguing I wouldn't have succeeded in trial - the wrong legal test).

To defeat it was a formality. I only had to show one piece of evidence could have been argued to just infer malice (without accessing chance of success), thereby Counsel's non submission caused loss of chance.

I easily met and far exceeded the legal test to defeat the Application and prove Loss of Chance Negligence with eleven pieces of evidence confirming Counsel's non-submission was a breach of duty of care which caused loss of chance. See here for details.

CASE FOR INJUSTICE AND ABUSE

Continuous abuse by Bristol County Court and four Hearings

subject to injustice and fundamental Human Rights Abuse.

Abuse and Bias - A Summary Judgment Application Hearing where the Court perversely and unlawfully dismissed my perfectly valid Loss of Chance Negligence claim. District Judge O'Neill was biased, took sides with the Defendant and acted with clear intent to dismiss my claim.

District Judge O'Neill mis-conducted the Hearing and performed the wrong legal tests.

She absurdly conducted an appeal of the underlying malicious prosecution claim dismissed in 2011 (irrelevant to my claim on omission), then conducted an unlawful malicious prosecution mini-trial, to determine whether I would win, to decide whether to allow my Negligence claim, an approach disallowed by case Law in both SJ Hearings and tort of LOC Negligence.

It then became District Judge O'Neill v the Claimant where she acted on the Defendant's behalf using her invalid opinions on criminal Law to dismiss my negligence claim.

She was not neutral on any aspect of the underlying claim required for a fair hearing.
Having decided to improperly conduct a Malicious Prosecution mini trial she further prejudiced me by making it impossible for me to succeed by acting as the CPS Prosecutor aiming to dismiss my particulars for any possible reason (regardless of legally correct).
She further prejudiced me by not reading my evidence and inferences for malice, and mis-represented my arguments she obtained by oral submission.
She further prejudiced me by conducting this mini -trial without considering my written submissions showing 'no probable cause to charge'.
Her findings were based on her flawed opinions of a limited part of criminal Law and her wrong belief, that despite being cleared, I had committed crimes, which she used to say my evidence if submitted would have failed. Thereby she concluded Counsel did not need to submit arguments that would not succeed, to dismiss my negligence claim. This was disallowed by case Law in both the tort of LOC Negligence and in SJ Hearings so an unlawful dismissal.
She shouldn't even have considered matters which could only be decided in a Malicious Prosecution or criminal trial but was anyway wrong in Law. But she ignored my written and verbal submissions on Case Law informing why she was wrong in Law, of an improperly conducted Hearing, and that I could argue my evidence.
Convicting me of crimes I was previously cleared of was astonishing, went against the outcome of a criminal trial, and was a collateral attack on a Crown Court's decision.
District Judge O'Neill never referred to the main points of my claim and accepted everything the Defendant said without question, resulting in false statements from their Application used in her judgment to dismiss my claim.
Most seriously she even introduced an argument on behalf of the Defendant when they failed to dismiss an important particular (so went against natural justice). I repeat - she acted for the Defendant, proving improper intent to dismiss the claim. Even worse was the fact her reason didn't dismiss the particular, was illogical and flawed in Law.
She failed to consider some particulars at all. All must be dismissed to dismiss the claim.
She issued a number of biased statements showing prejudice :

(a) condemned my opinions in a past letter which were legal and irrelevant to the claim (by

writing them in her judgment and requesting they be attached), showing she saw me as

a criminal; (b) Stated I had committed crimes; (c) Excessively praised the Defendant

and ignored his obvious error; (d) Accepted the CPS Prosecutor was innocent in the

underlying claim when required to be neutral; (e) Stated Counsel protected me by not

submitting my evidence (i.e. ludicrously stating no evidence is better than evidence, for a

claim requiring evidence).

This was tyranny, more a criminal Trial than a Summary Judgment Hearing. I received an unfair Hearing in breach of my Human Rights under ECHR article 6 ( Right to a fair hearing by an impartial tribunal). DJ O'Neill's dismissal was not legally sustainable and dismissed the torts. The hearing was a farce, unlawful, unfair and conducted in a manner to make sure the claim was dismissed.

DJ O'Neill was biased and abused her position by acting with intent to dismiss my claim.

Analysis shows Fourteen legal errors, eight prejudicial acts (actual bias), and at least four biased statements.

More Abuse - A request for permission to Appeal with ten grounds covering the above errors in Law, prejudicial acts and breach of the Human Rights Act, was astonishingly refused by His Honour Judge Ralton on paper and then at an oral Hearing. This despite obviously substantial valid reasons to allow an appeal under CPR52.21 - Legal and factual errors, procedural errors, matters not taken into consideration and bias by the Lower Court.

HHJ Ralton simply ignored my Grounds, and refused to accept my submissions and case Law.

His Judgment issued a false statement to dismiss nine of ten grounds, then a false reason in Law to

dismiss the cause of action. He then tried to justify the Lower Court's decisions by falsehoods and

blatant lies. I repeat - he lied. In other words, HHJ Ralton abused his position and acted with

injustice and intent to maintain dismissal of a claim he knew and was informed and could have no

doubt, had been wrongly and unlawfully dismissed. He was complicit with the Lower Court bias.

On analysis, my reasons for appeal were deliberately ignored. Seven acts of improper intent (bad faith and an

unfair hearing) and four others that show an unfair Hearing are identified. This was further Human Rights abuse.

An Application Hearing to request District Judge O'Neill stand down for the cost Hearing. She refused and lied (denying she had not offered her own reasons to dismiss the claim). However it later transpired that she was disqualified by outside influence having been made aware of a complaint by the Court to the Police of an alleged threat against her, which in Law prevented her conducting the Costs Hearing due to conflict of interests. Note: There was no threat and the baseless prosecution was rejected with no case to answer.

It gets worse - An unfair Cost Hearing conducted by a disqualified Judge who gave me an excessive cost order, almost certainly based on spite. Despite my stated wish to accept the Defendants part 36 offer before the Hearing, District Judge O'Neill didn't give me a chance to amend my acceptance letter. She then rejected my submissions on costs, proportionality and CPR practise directions and gave me the maximum cost order possible without concessions (almost unheard of). This included costs not caused or incurred by myself which can be argued as a fraud. The Defendant was trying it on with costs and she gave them what they wanted. I believe if they asked £5000 for one phone call she would have allowed it. It was a ridiculously excessive order, totally disproportional to the amount claimed (3 to 4 times more), based in part on her acceptance of the Defendant unnecessarily expanding the claim, and in part her obvious dislike of me and affect of outside influence.

And even worse - HHJ Ralton refused permission to Appeal both the Costs Order and recusal Application. His reasons don't stand up. My Grounds were clearly arguable points for Appeal and the recusal point was supported by case Law, so could not be rightly dismissed in a permission Hearing. HHJ Ralton appears not to accept the right to a fair Hearing by a Judge free from influence, nor my right to argue case Law, and right to challenge costs not caused or incurred. I'm sure if I requested appeal of £5000 for one phone call, he would have refused it. He appears not interested in justice or Law, but in obtaining the outcome he wants, in this case, to maintain an unfair and excessive cost order. That is because he is complicit with the bias and spite of the lower Court Judge.

HHJ Ralton refused to transfer the oral appeals when requested, because he wanted to keep control and refuse permission. Transferring, risks being heard by an honest judge. However he knows District Judge O'Neill, thereby cannot preside over a Hearing involving her. Knowledge of an involved party was why the claim was originally transfered to Bristol. Due to the cost risk of the oral Hearings going before an obviously dishonest and biased Judge, acting with malice, I took advice to settle with the Defendant and withdraw the appeals.

Every decision went against me. Most were wrong in fact or Law. There was clear intent to deny me justice and cause harm by excessive costs. These Judges would never have allowed any reason in any circumstances to allow my claim or reduce costs. How could such a compelling and proven claim with so much evidence be dismissed for no prospect of success? How could an appeal Court say I could not argue so many legal, factual and procedural errors ? How could I get no concessions for so many cost arguments ? Answer: By Dishonest Judges ignoring the Law and my submissions and making perverse decisions to get the outcome they wanted.

Questions

I asked these questions with a promise to remove this site if these Judges show they acted properly, and conformed with the Law As yet, I received no answers, confirming they have no issue and no right to complain about this site.

Please email your comments or support.