Court Order 25 November 2009 McCanns v Bennett
Page 1 of 1 • Share
Court Order 25 November 2009 McCanns v Bennett
This is just to report here that yesterday in the Queens Bench Division, Dr Gerald McCann and Dr Kate McCann made an application against me, Reference 5196 of 2009, for an unspecified amount of damages for libel, though limited to 'no more than £50,000', and for an injunction restraining me from making any further libellous allegations against them.
On the basis of previous correspondence conducted via Carter-Ruck since their first e-mailed letter sent on 27 August 2009, and on the basis of a signed undertaking by myself earlier this month, the following has been agreed BY CONSENT:
1. I have given a number of undertakings as required by Carter-Ruck on behalf of the McCanns
2. The McCanns have agreed that the proceedings be 'stayed' indefinitley, that is, suspended or held in abeyance
3. I have already paid what was said to have been the Court fee of £440.00
4. The McCanns have made no other claim against me in respect of their costs.
There was no personal appearance in Court by any of the parties.
NOTES:
1. I should like to publicly thank the following for generous contributions already received towards my costs of £440:
a) Peter MacLeod
b) Sharon Lawrence
c) Renee Neuville
d) 'Bomaris'.
2. Carter-Ruck told me today that they had got the Court fee wrong and that it was only £400. Their letter to me today (26 November) states:
"Please also find enclosed a cheque in the sum of £40.00; these funds are being returned to you because the Court fees incurred by our clients totalled only £400.00, rather than the £440.00 we had anticipated".
On the basis of previous correspondence conducted via Carter-Ruck since their first e-mailed letter sent on 27 August 2009, and on the basis of a signed undertaking by myself earlier this month, the following has been agreed BY CONSENT:
1. I have given a number of undertakings as required by Carter-Ruck on behalf of the McCanns
2. The McCanns have agreed that the proceedings be 'stayed' indefinitley, that is, suspended or held in abeyance
3. I have already paid what was said to have been the Court fee of £440.00
4. The McCanns have made no other claim against me in respect of their costs.
There was no personal appearance in Court by any of the parties.
NOTES:
1. I should like to publicly thank the following for generous contributions already received towards my costs of £440:
a) Peter MacLeod
b) Sharon Lawrence
c) Renee Neuville
d) 'Bomaris'.
2. Carter-Ruck told me today that they had got the Court fee wrong and that it was only £400. Their letter to me today (26 November) states:
"Please also find enclosed a cheque in the sum of £40.00; these funds are being returned to you because the Court fees incurred by our clients totalled only £400.00, rather than the £440.00 we had anticipated".
Tony Bennett- Researcher
- Posts : 16906
Activity : 24770
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 76
Location : Shropshire
Re: Court Order 25 November 2009 McCanns v Bennett
Tony
Is this over and above the CR stuff or is it part of the same?
Bit slow today
Is this over and above the CR stuff or is it part of the same?
Bit slow today
Pussycat- Posts : 127
Activity : 133
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2009-11-25
Re: Court Order 25 November 2009 McCanns v Bennett
what slimeballs the mccanns are.they would rob thier own granny,ar*** they are.
Mike- Posts : 163
Activity : 174
Likes received : 4
Join date : 2009-11-25
Re: Court Order 25 November 2009 McCanns v Bennett
i want to know how the hell are they still getting away with this,where in gods name are the express newspaper
why the hell dont they print some thing usefull instead of dancing the mccanns tune.
why the hell dont they print some thing usefull instead of dancing the mccanns tune.
Mike- Posts : 163
Activity : 174
Likes received : 4
Join date : 2009-11-25
Re: Court Order 25 November 2009 McCanns v Bennett
Pussycat wrote:Tony
Is this over and above the CR stuff or is it part of the same?
Bit slow today
This is the end result of the Carter-Ruck letter to me on 27 August alleging harassment and libel. The harasssment issue against me was dropped.
I don't know what is happening re the Carter-Ruck letters to Debbie Butler.
The McCanns can apply to proceed with their action if they think I am in brecah of my undertakings, and the Court could consider me in contempt of court, remedies for which include fines, seizure of assets, a prison term, or all three.
Equally, should new information come to light, I could apply to have the Order lifted.
Tony Bennett- Researcher
- Posts : 16906
Activity : 24770
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 76
Location : Shropshire
Re: Court Order 25 November 2009 McCanns v Bennett
@tony, a few questions on the donations(?) for court/lawyer fees, if you dont mind...
(1) were the donations from those four private people made to the madeleine foundation - or specifically to you (and not debbie) ?
(2) were they made to pay those court fees, or for the general "Carter-Ruck-issue" ?
(here the "text" on the bank slips could help maybe)
(3) can you tell, what dates these payments were credited ?
(4) could debbie also benefit from them, for payments towards "her" CR/court fees ?
(5) as the donations were less than the 400 GBP, was the remaining amount taken from the MF or did was it paid from your private money ?
(i just call it "CR/court" fees, as im not so sure what they are, as CR seems to have invoiced them)
(1) were the donations from those four private people made to the madeleine foundation - or specifically to you (and not debbie) ?
(2) were they made to pay those court fees, or for the general "Carter-Ruck-issue" ?
(here the "text" on the bank slips could help maybe)
(3) can you tell, what dates these payments were credited ?
(4) could debbie also benefit from them, for payments towards "her" CR/court fees ?
(5) as the donations were less than the 400 GBP, was the remaining amount taken from the MF or did was it paid from your private money ?
(i just call it "CR/court" fees, as im not so sure what they are, as CR seems to have invoiced them)
scrafen- Posts : 167
Activity : 162
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2009-11-25
Similar topics
» THE 17-PAGE LIST OF OF POLICE OFFICERS, PUBLIC OFFICIALS, AUTHORS, WEBSITES, BLOGGERS ETC given to the High Court by Tony Bennett in the contempt of court case of McCanns v Bennett
» CMOMM: THE FIRST SEVEN YEARS: 25 November 2009 > 25 November 2016
» COURT REPORT 5th and 6th February: McCanns v Bennett
» The meeting between DCI Roe, Essex Police and Tony Bennett, 17 Dec 2009
» McCanns v Amaral - HOW IT ALL STARTED - The disgraceful, secret court hearing in September 2009 that started off this tortuous, 8-year-long wait for a final outcome
» CMOMM: THE FIRST SEVEN YEARS: 25 November 2009 > 25 November 2016
» COURT REPORT 5th and 6th February: McCanns v Bennett
» The meeting between DCI Roe, Essex Police and Tony Bennett, 17 Dec 2009
» McCanns v Amaral - HOW IT ALL STARTED - The disgraceful, secret court hearing in September 2009 that started off this tortuous, 8-year-long wait for a final outcome
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum