Daily Mail 1 Prince Harry & Others 0

[spen666]

I posted a link to an article.
You didn't read the article.
You decided it was about 'the ruling'.
It wasn't.
End of debate.

Thanks for telling me I didn't read the article I had read.

Wonder what other lies you will nake up about what I have or gave not done?

 

[bobzmyunkle]

Thanks for telling me I didn't read the article I had read.

Wonder what other lies you will nake up about what I have or gave not done?

I posted a link to an article.
You did read the article.
You decided it was about 'the ruling'.
It wasn't.
End of debate

Sorry Spen but that really is the end of the debate. There might be a good reason why you carry on like this, but I can't be arsed with it.

 

[spen666]

I posted a link to an article.
You did read the article.
You decided it was about 'the ruling'.
It wasn't.
End of debate

Sorry Spen but that really is the end of the debate. There might be a good reason why you carry on like this, but I can't be arsed with it.

Again, thank you for telling me what i did or did not do.

What other lies do you want to make up about me?

You have not got a clue, so you just tell lies.

I may not have given the answer you wanted me to give. I gave the answer i wanted to give.


You make up lies about me despite you not knowing what I have done.

You then compound it by repeating those lies.

 

[Pblakeney]

I posted a link to an article.
You did read the article.
You decided it was about 'the ruling'.
It wasn't.
End of debate

Sorry Spen but that really is the end of the debate. There might be a good reason why you carry on like this, but I can't be arsed with it.

Hopefully understanding the futility has set in.

 

[spen666]

Hopefully understanding the futility has set in.

Telling lies about me is futile

 

[spen666]

Re this case & Lawrence & others.

In the past the term champerty would be an issue

 

[Psamathe]

As of a couple of weeks ago looks like Harry et. al.'s legal fee insurance is not going to come close to cover the costs being claimed by Associated Newspapers

In a two-day hearing beginning on Wednesday to determine how costs should be paid, the court heard there was a shortfall between the £16.2m insurance cover the claimants had, and ANL’s reported costs of £34.5m.

Lawyers for ANL say the claimants should pay its costs on an indemnity basis, under which the losing party covers the other side’s costs without the need to show that those costs are proportionate.
(rom https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...ce-huge-legal-bill-due-to-insurance-shortfall)

I'm no supporter of ANL but they were accused, taken to court. My understanding is that even though a civil case where it's "balance of probabilities" rather than "beyond doubt" and they still didn't have the evidence to back-up their case so seems to me reasonable that they pay ANL costs. Harry et. al. chose to go to court not ANL.

Harry seems to have a continual stream of cases going through UK courts these days.