View Single Post
Old 11-23-2010, 10:03 PM   #190
Marco911
Marcosexual Fan Club, CEO
 
Marco911's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: US Bush-country
Posts: 7,741
Thanked 823 Times in 284 Posts
Failed 236 Times in 113 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by dangonay View Post
Where did you get the idea your car can be sold before going to court? It can't. The police have no right to sell it, nor does the government. A judge has to make a decision and you get your day in court.
Civil court, where the burden of proof is lower. Nevertheless, the government has to prove that "damage" has occurred:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawsuit

Next, tell me which category of "damage" does this offence fall under?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damages

You will see that unless the cars crashed into persons or property there is no category where this offence would fall into where anyone has suffered any "damage."

"Punitive damages" is the ONLY category which is remotely close to where this offence might fall under and is worth quoting because it is very questionable as to its implementation:

Quote:
Generally, punitive damages, which are also termed exemplary damages in the United Kingdom, are not awarded in order to compensate the plaintiff, but in order to reform or deter the defendant and similar persons from pursuing a course of action such as that which damaged the plaintiff. Punitive damages are awarded only in special cases where conduct was egregiously invidious and are over and above the amount of compensatory damages, such as in the event of malice or intent. Great judicial restraint is expected to be exercised in their application. In the United States punitive damages awards are subject to the limitations imposed by the due process of law clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

In England and Wales, exemplary damages are limited to the circumstances set out by Lord Patrick Devlin in the leading case of Rookes v. Barnard. They are:

1.Oppressive, arbitrary or unconstitutional actions by the servants of government.
2.Where the defendant's conduct was 'calculated' to make a profit for himself.
3.Where a statute expressly authorises the same.
Rookes v Barnard has been much criticised and has not been followed in Canada or Australia or by the Privy Council.

Punitive damages awarded in a US case would be difficult to get recognition for in a European court, where punitive damages are most likely to be considered to violate ordre public.[2]
Now, do you see why I consider this to be such an outrage? This case needs to be appealed.
__________________
Poor is the man whose pleasures depend on the permission of another.

Last edited by Marco911; 11-23-2010 at 10:08 PM.
Marco911 is offline   Reply With Quote