Hot Air

[JonathanM]

The judge separated the fact from the opinion, and found that the facts were true, but even if they weren't the defence of honsest opinion was made out to his satisfaction.

I don't think that can be true. The major part of the judgment revolves around subsection 4a) of the honest opinion defence. The opinion and the facts are intrinsically bound together. Having the honest opinion relies on the fact being proved. There are pages and pages of discussion about the meaning of moving a global head office, relocating a business etc. in order to determine whether it was a fact that Dyson did actually move its global head office to Singapore

(4) The third condition is that an honest person could have held the opinion on the basis of —

(a) any fact which existed at the time the statement complained of was published;

 

[Notch7]

Brexit was the best think the British public did for themselves since WWII

Since you know nothing about how the EU works, how the single market works or how international trade works you aren’t qualified to know that

The Brits are ace at doing what's right, not what is best in the short term

The Brits keep voting for Tory govts and now the U.K. has a standard of living way behind equivalent Western economies.

so you are demonstrably wrong

Brexit just needs time

The massive trade barriers which Brexit caused by leaving the single market are permanent, it makes no difference how long we give it brexit will continue to be a drag on trade competiveness

Something the selfish

I agree brexit was incredibly selfish

1) it put a customs border inside UK

2) Brits no longer have the right to live, work, retire in 27 countries

3) owners of British businesses no longer have the freedom to trade in a frictionless market of £16 trillion

the short sighted are not prepared to accept

Brexit was an incredibly short sighted decision.

Brexit voters were convinced by emotive slogans, not facts

 

[Notch7]

That argument has been done to death.

What you actually mean is: you can’t answer

 

[noseall]

That argument has been done to death.

You mean the other Brexit benefit? I get that Brexers get a hard on when they see their little crowns on their pint pots, but Reesmuggs' desire to go imperial?

FFS.

Wrecking trade with the EU for a little crown and the threat to return the UK to some backwards imperial garbage? Benefits my arse.

Brexit - total pile of turd.

 

[BlueLoo]

Since you know nothing about how the EU works, how the single market works or how international trade works you aren’t qualified to know that


The Brits keep voting for Tory govts and now the U.K. has a standard of living way behind equivalent Western economies.

so you are demonstrably wrong


The massive trade barriers which Brexit caused by leaving the single market are permanent, it makes no difference how long we give it brexit will continue to be a drag on trade competiveness


I agree brexit was incredibly selfish

1) it put a customs border inside UK

2) Brits no longer have the right to live, work, retire in 27 countries

3) owners of British businesses no longer have the freedom to trade in a frictionless market of £16 trillion


Brexit was an incredibly short sighted decision.

Brexit voters were convinced by emotive slogans, not facts

I live in the EU

 

[BlueLoo]

What you actually mean is: you can’t answer

No, i can.
But you'll revert to generalisations and exaggerating as you have.

It's simply to early to tell.

 

[gant]

I live in the EU

Also new to me you can't work in the EU.
I think we can safely say notch tells lies.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

That argument has been done to death.

It's been asked continually I agree.

Haven't seen, or understand what they will be, or when.

You must have a good understanding of them to make the statement you did.

So, please. Go on. Tell us the benefits and when we will see them.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

It’s hard to follow, I appreciate that. But no it doesn’t contradict anything I’ve said.

@JonathanM you have correctly interpreted the judgement.

and my comment that it looked pretty weak was a comment on the strength of the claimant’s claim. Not a comment on the judgement.

If you cannot prove serious harm. You have no case.

I wonder how much he spent on his legal case and why his lawyers thought it was a good idea to go to court if they couldn't prove this serious harm

 

[BlueLoo]

It's been asked continually I agree.

Haven't seen, or understand what they will be, or when.

You must have a good understanding of them to make the statement you did.

So, please. Go on. Tell us the benefits and when we will see them.

My answer is clear.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

My answer is clear.

No it really isnt.

Make it clear, if you can

 

[carmanmemoranda]

Pretty much, though..

The judge has to look at 3 things. The harm, the facts and the opinions.

The facts were not disputed. He did move HQ…
The opinion that he was a hypocrite etc. are just opinion. Had the facts been incorrect it would have changed the dynamics but probably not the outcome.

The judge did not rule that the opinion was fact. The opinions have not been validated by the judge. They have been categorised as opinions.

He has not been proven to be a hypocrite according to the judgement.

The only bit anyone really needs to read is the second to last paragraph.

Is that where the point made, stands ?

So the opinion was based on facts

 

[noseall]

No, i can.
But you'll revert to generalisations and exaggerating as you have.

It's simply to early to tell.

The vote was 2016.

Reesmugg said 50 years before were likely to see any benefits. Would you say this is accurate?

 

[Roy Bloom]

2) Brits no longer have the right to live, work, retire in 27 countries

Also new to me you can't work in the EU.
I think we can safely say notch tells lies.

Read Notch's comment. Try to understand it.
If you can't comprehend the exact meaning of his comment, you's best keep quiet instead of confirming your inability to read English, and understand it.

 

[gant]

Read Notch's comment. Try to understand it.
If you can't comprehend the exact meaning of his comment, you's best keep quiet instead of confirming your inability to read English, and understand it.

Which 27 countries do think he's talking about that I couldn't work in?