Wrongful dismisal

District Judge O'Neill - wrong and unlawful dismissal.

The Defendant's Application for Summary Judgment unfortunately came before District Judge O'Neill at Bristol County Court on 18th October 2018, who wrongly and unlawfully dismissed the claim in a ridiculously unfair Hearing.

She read some views on file, that had no relevance to the claim, made clear she took offence, then did everything possible to make sure the claim was dismissed. The Hearing was a farce. It was supposed to be a Summary Judgment Hearing for Loss of Chance Negligence, but she misconducted it.

Firstly as an appeal of the underlying malicious prosecution claim dismissed in 2011 to conclude the claim was properly dismissed and Counsel acted properly - totally irrelevant to my claim based on omission of evidence not before the Court in 2011.

Then as a Malicious Prosecution mini-trial to see if my 'missed arguments would have succeeded in trial', in order to allow my Negligence claim to proceed, an approach disallowed by case Law in both Summary Judgment and tort of Loss of Chance Negligence. She made findings on contested Facts, evidence and Law on balance of probability, again disallowed by Case Law.

When I submitted this Hearing was improperly conducted, she replied she could run it how she wanted.

I only had to show material evidence that could have been argued to infer improper motive (which Counsel failed to submit). But the District Judge had not read my document with this evidence, nor inferences and legal arguments.

Instead, she asked for my arguments by oral submission, continuously interrupted me for the next point, then rushed to retire. It was not possible to submit evidence verbally in context of intent. Evidence had to be read.

The District Judge based her decisions on her own mis-representations without reference to evidence or improper motive.

She did not understand my arguments, but never asked for clarification. In one case she combined two points, said they were in contradiction, despite being entirely separate points and her creating the contradiction!

But it got worse - the Hearing became District Judge O'Neill v Claimant.

Judge O'Neill was supposed to be neutral on the underlying Malicious Prosecution claim and was not. She undermined the claim and conducted the Hearing in a manner that made it impossible to succeed, taking the position of the CPS Prosecutor facing the points she wrote down in a malicious prosecution mini trial, acting with intent to dismiss them. She showed that she supported the past prosecution, believed the Prosecutor acted properly in Law, didn't accept the improper motive of the claim, and used her invalid opinions of criminal Law to convict me of the criminal offences I was previously cleared of. She thereby justified the charges and how the Prosecutor obtained statements and coerced witnesses to be victims. From this, she concluded that because my Particulars would not have succeeded in Trial, Counsel did not need to submit the evidence, so dismissed my Loss of Chance Negligence Claim for no prospect of success.

LEGAL AND PROCEDURAL ERRORS

I could write pages on why this was unlawfully and unfairly dismissed. Here are some of them :

Conducted a pointless Appeal then a malicious prosecution mini-trial to determine whether to allow my negligence claim to proceed, both wrong for a negligence claim about omission of evidence, and not prescribed in Law.

Failed to read my document setting out my evidence and inferences (point on intent). She requested points by oral submission, mis-represented them without referring to evidence or intent, then dismissed them because she didn't understand what she wrote. She notably failed to ask me to clarify my arguments. I was obviously prejudiced by this procedural error.

Failed to perform the correct legal test for both Loss of chance Negligence and a Summary Judgment Hearing. That was to consider whether the Claimant's non submitted evidence could be argued to show or infer the 'improper motive of the malicious prosecution claim' or charging without true belief in guilt, so was material in this claim.

Instead her malicious prosecution mini trial set me an impossible test - to prove the particulars (she wrote down)

would succeed in a Malicious Prosecution trial, where she acted as the CPS Prosecutor aiming to dismiss them

by using her flawed opinions of criminal Law. In reality eleven sub particulars supported by material evidence

confirmed Counsel breached his duty of care and caused loss of chance by non submission, so the claim was

made out, and was wrongly dismissed.

Failed to consider that contested facts, evidence and inferences are always a matter for Trial, so defeated the Application. Made findings on balance of probability on contested Criminal Law and evidence that could only be decided in a Malicious Prosecution Trial.

Made prejudicial findings on the tort of Malicious Prosecution, when required to be neutral for a fair Hearing. This included findings on criminal Law, cause to charge, assuming the CPS prosecutor was innocent and had acted properly in Law. By fact and Law there was no cause to charge, the Prosecutor errored in Law and none of the above was a matter for this Hearing.

Made findings which were based on her invalid opinions of Criminal Law, where she should not have considered this and which were wrong in Law, and failed to consider my written submissions telling her she was wrong in Law/

Convicted me of crimes I was cleared of in a civil Hearing and used this to assume cause to charge and dismiss my claim. This was astonishing and far exceeded her remit. It was also a collateral attack on a criminal Court decision.

Disregarded the improper motive of the underlying Malicious Prosecution claim, agreed by both parties, so rejected evidential particulars that could show or infer this. She thereby acted as a party against the Claimant.

Most seriously, where the Defendant failed to dismiss a particular (when natural justice meant I succeeded), she acted on their behalf to introduce an argument in Law to dismiss it. A Judge cannot act for a party which is actual bias. Worse - her argument failed to dismiss my particular, failed in Law and she denied me the right of reply.

Issued false statement which included that my claim was a collateral attack on a Courts decision, which showed she just accepted everything the Defendant said without question and wrote them back to dismiss the Claim.

Issued prejudiced statements that showed she was biased against the Claimant and supported the Defendant.