What's new
By:
Filters
Navy Net - Royal Navy Community

Register a free account today to join our community
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site, connect with other members through your own private inbox and will receive smaller adverts!

Not all one way

Its nice to see that a Muslim group is also concerned with this issue.
My concern is that Muslims who have an issue with uniform/clothing regulations are able to apply for legal aid. How many would persue these issues if they had to fund the case themselves?
 
From my recolection most of the recent cases of this nature have in fact been supported by Muslim associations. Mind you if the case is entitled to legal aid under the rules why should it not be given or are Muslims not as eligible as non Muslims?
 
There are far too many cases today which go to litigation at great puplic expense. Many of these cases are of a fairly trivial nature but end up costing the taxpayer/council tax payer many thousands of pounds. Legal aid should be available, however there should be an upper limit to the costs. Perhaps we should get the injury lawyers involved no win no fee. They would do a risk assessment on the case and many cases would never get to court. Result fewer court cases.
As for this case as there has been a similar case in Luton his case result should be used for the rest of England & Wales.
 
There are a few problems with legal aid, the biggest being that it creates a vast legal underclass, those who do not qualify for aid but at the same time do not have the resources to go to law.

Unlike the no win no fee ambulance chasers legal aid does in fact claw back costs from any awards made, so it is not just you and I funding Johnny or Jeanie to line their own pockets.

Rather than cap legal aid which would effectively remove recourse to the law for even more of our society, it would be far better to find ways in which the legal process can be streamlined to cut costs, this would equally benefit the very large numbers who currently get no legal aid and thus have little recourse to the law to solve problems.

As it stands legal aid does depend on a risk assesment, but it is also tempered with the whether the case is important, so yes they will fund some one to fail, because from the point of the public good the failure can be important. I would put the legality of school dress codes in that bracket.
 
slim said:
Its nice to see that a Muslim group is also concerned with this issue.
My concern is that Muslims who have an issue with uniform/clothing regulations are able to apply for legal aid. How many would persue these issues if they had to fund the case themselves?
Click to expand...

The same of course applies to Christian fundamentalists whose legal costs are bankrolled by charities such as the Christian Lawyers Fellowship (CLF), such as the BA case, where Nadia Eweida is demanding BA "donate" £100K to the CLF. Here is a case of a business with a non-religious ethos (BA) that is being bullied into accomodating special rights for the religious whilst religious businesses have an entitlement to opt out of respecting the rights of non-religious employees. What we need is legal equity. Businesses with a non-religious ethos should have the same rights as businesses with a religious ethos. Abolishing Sunday Trading restrictions is needed for a start! This way we are being consistent. At present we appear to be targetting the Muslim community whilst ignoring our own violation of the human rights of non-theists which in the last Census made up almost a quarter of the population.
 
A_a_C

In all fairness, it would be nice to have just one day without wall to wall commercialism. It doesn't take much to get our s**t in one sock and get what we need on a Saturday. I've worked shifts/watches and that argument doesn't wash.

Thus spake the atheist!
 
higthepig said:
I`m with you POL
Click to expand...

To be fair AAC's comment are no more or less predictable than some other contributors.In fact I suspect the same accusation could be levelled at me from time to time as well.
 
I just get tired from time to time maxie with all this christian fundamentalist crap and the rights of gays, but then thats me, i suppose i can be a pain in the arse too at times. But at the end of the day whatever may be said it is a christian country we live in.
 
Hig, if you look at the church attendance figures this country is not quite as Christian as it used to be, and that is not because of imigration but because more and more people are questioning why they should join organisations where the leaders still do not follow their own teaching.
 
higthepig said:
..... But at the end of the day whatever may be said it is a christian country we live in.
Click to expand...

Britain is at best secular and, judging by the 'me, me, me' approach of most, could never fit the dictionary description of Christian. Incidentally, going to church is not an indication of your Christianity, any more than going through the motions of any religious practice makes an individual a "good" member of their religious community. There are too many 'devout' followers of various religions who are anything but.
 

Latest Threads

New Posts

Top