Orams Case: the end

oramsThis is the final part of report taken from Bill Cobbett’s excellent notes on www.cyprus-forum.com:

Mr A went back to the topic of public policy and quoted from an accepted authority on the matter when he said public policy should only be considered when there’s a “breach to the legal order of the state”. The judges agreed that this authority’s view was significant.

Mr A refers to the application to go back to the ECJ as “reaction material” of ” raw political arguments” and brought up the subject of bias. He condemns the application as having been “kept up the sleeve” and said the Orams knew about it and should have disclosed it earlier. He then makes the points that Mr Skouris has met with a delegation from Turkey as part of his duties as ECJ duties. He makes the point there are 10 other members of the ECJ involved in the opinion and says that Skouris travels frequently to publicise the work of the ECJ and, as its President, promotes the free movement of judgements.

The Cyprus award in question is the Grand Cross. Mr A says this was awarded in 2006. He said that the Orams had claimed it was awarded for “loyalty” to Cyprus. Mr A says it doesn’t it refers to “support”. Mr A says that in the case of the ECJ judges there is a “presumption of integrity”.

Bill then writes, “anyway, and with greetings to our new readers in the Occupied North will, press on …. ” We at NCFP say greeting to you Bill, for you excellent quality reporting.

Mr A then turned to the application from the British Residents Society, the “others” referred to in the action. Again Mr A condemns the late application and an attempt to admit new evidence which he further condemns in its various references to the laws of north Cyprus.

Mr A says this is the BRS, “coming to this court and saying the ECJ got it wrong.”

On the matter of the BRS, Mr A goes further and says …”there is no other state,” the ECJ was right to ignore TRNC law. Mr A says that the RoC would have been showing “dereliction in its duties if it didn’t try to execute its judgements in its sovereign territory .”

Also in response to the BRS, Mr A enters a couple of legal authorities, the Manual of Armed Conflict and one other in support of the illegal status of north Cyprus and its laws.

Mr A goes on to say that accepting the BRS submission would be contrary to GB treaty obligations, UN Resolutions and others which respect the integrity, sovereignty, jurisdiction of the RoC.

Mr A finishes by asking for an order to action the RoC court order and for costs.

At this stage, another barrister, who was there for the two days, and who we believe was acting for the BRS rose and tried to submit an application. The Presiding Judge refused the application at this late stage. The barrister sat down.

For the last twenty minutes of the day, the Oram’s QC gave a summary of their grounds for application, asking for a referral back to the ECJ of all five questions with the bias claim.

At the end the Presiding Judge said judgement would be reserved and a draft judgement issued (no indication of when, could be days or weeks and weeks) with the final judgement two days subsequently.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Comments are closed.