Drama here at the beginning of Day 5 of Morrison v BFF in Belfast. Morrison's legal team have informed the judge that they will not be ready to start until 2pm. The judge is livid. Says it is not for counsel to dictate when court sits.
Neither barrister representing Morrison is in court. Her solicitor Simon Chambers is fielding the questions. Judge said she is "disgusted" by being so "heavily disrespected" by one side.
She is furious that neither counsel for Morrison (Naomi Cunningham and Charlotte Elves) have had the courtesy to appear before her this morning to explain what is going on.
Also judge understands there is an application being made, but says it should have been presented to her before 1130 this morning. Chambers apologises for the message which he wrote to the court telling the judge his side were not ready to begin. Says he is under...
... a lot of pressure. New information apparently came to light at 10am this morning and he says the nature of it means Morrison's side want to make a recusal application.
He apologises for the potential this has to "capsize matters". Judge wants to know when the BFF team were informed. Chambers says when they arrived at court this morning.
Judge wants to know why Cunningham and Elves "have left you to deal with this". Chambers says they are both "locked in their lodgings" writing the application.
Judge turns to Sean Doherty for the BFF. Doherty lists the authorities Judge will need to consider when the application is made.
And that any recusal application will be "vehemently opposed".
Judge is, to use NI vernacular "ragin'"
Points out that she asked Claimants' side two weeks ago for a schedule to be handed up on Monday and it still hasn't been done.
J "I am not happy about the way this has been handled... the complete lack of courtesy and disrespect which has been shown by your counsel this morning". Points out that Michele Devlin is still under oath and has been since Wednesday. Makes it clear whether MD has finished...
... her evidence or not she will be released from oath for the weekend.
Doesn't see why the court should be kept waiting until 2pm. Asks what's the problem with starting at 1pm. Chambers asks if he can make a phone call before answering. Other side have not problem. Judge makes a decision.
“Get them here for one o’clock”.
“Get them here for one o’clock”.
There follows a discussion about proceedings being held in private. Both Chambers and Doherty indicate a preference for it to be held in private. I stand up, Judge allows me to speak and I say that if the parties which the recusal to be held in private...
... I would seek to oppose it in the interests of open justice given the decision that will be made in or after the hearing could have a significant outcome on the case.
I am going to do what I can to read up on the authorities I can use to make the case for being present at and reporting the recusal application, but I would be extremely grateful if there were any media lawyers or court reporters...
... (particularly if you are up on NI employment tribunal recusal proceedings)... to help me out via DM.
Okay I've had a chat with a couple of legal people and had a look at the rules and it looks like there is no rule that recusal hearings must be held in private. It also...
... looks like there would be no strong objection to the application hearing being made in public.
The judge, does, however, have a right (apparently) to privately carpet the parties, which she is doing right now. But I've been told by a clerk the application hearing will not go ahead before I've had the opportunity to be heard. There is another journalist here who will join
... me in my representation, if necessary.
Tempted to start a new thread.
Let's start a new thread.
Let's start a new thread.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
