Search

Running Commentary on Claim J00ME572: 14.33 pm (UK-Time) 29 July 2022

HEARING OF 27 OCTOBER 2022, 10 AM AT MEDWAY COUNTY COURT2

Yahoo

/

Sent

Shantanu Panigrahi <shantanupanigrahi@yahoo.com>

To:

Enquiries Medway County

Cc:

Orla Scanlan



Fri, 29 Jul at 07:58


To

The Court Manager

Medway County Court


Dear Sir/Madam


1. I was hoping to receive further clarification on the attached Directions from the Court on Claim J00ME572 (Hearing27Oct2022_10.00am.pdf) by way of an explanation because the contents are so limited in relation to what I wish to discuss at the Hearing.


2. If all issues are open for consideration at the Hearing itself, then I will of course attend the Hearing but I would appreciate if the agenda at the Hearing is outlined further point by point as follows:


(a) has jurisdiction for the Court to impose the Injunction sought against the Chief Constable of Kent Police been challenged by the Defendant or will be challenged at the Hearing? - in this regard please note that the name of the Chief Constable is not Hugh Pughesley but Alan Pughesley.


(b) will the only matter to be considered is the Defendant's application and not what has subsequently superseded the Claimant's Applications with new particulars of Claim as I have kept the Court informed on since the issue of the Notice of Issue was served on the Defendant?


(c) Will the Money Claims application be considered for jurisdiction or has jurisdiction already been accepted by the Defendant?


(d) Have the full costs of the Defendant been submitted to the Court as the document attached indicates?


(e) will any other party listed as co-conspirators by the Clamant in the Money Claims Application be asked by the Court to submit written evidence to the Court prior to the Hearing or will this be part of the issues that are to be discussed at the Hearing for fresh new Directions?


(f) Will the Pre-action Protocol served on me by BLM Law on the Claimant but which has not been followed up by the Law Firm be part of the considerations at the Hearing, or should the Defendant be required to find another Law Firm to represent it at the Hearing due to conflict of interests inherent which requires this Law Firm to recuse itself from the proceedings?


(e) In the absence of the interim report on the investigations of alleged harassment and stalking dating back to 15 September 2021 and subsequent arrest of the Claimant on 24 November 2021 will it be required by the Court prior to the Hearing if Kent Police has still not completed its investigations on the allegations against the Claimant?


(f) What is the name of the Judge who considered the matter hitherto and Directed the attached Notice of Directions Hearing - this is required by the Claimant in order for these Directions to be challenged at a Higher Court if necessary.


3. Due to the urgency for any Appeal against the Directions issued, I would be grateful for a reply to this email today so that I may try and instruct a Law Firm to implement the Appeal or to represent me at the Hearing with all the facts needed for this consultation.


Yours sincerely


Dr Shantanu Panigrahi

(Claimant)

3 Hoath Lane

Wigmore

Gillingham

Kent ME8 0SL

Tel: 07967789619


Attachment

J00ME572 (1)Hearing27Oct2022_10.00am.pdf 603.7kB:



J00ME572 (1)Hearing27Oct2022_10.00am
.pdf
Download PDF • 618KB

____________________________________________________________________


Medway County, Enquiries <enquiries.medway.countycourt@justice.gov.uk>

To:

Shantanu Panigrahi

Cc:

Orla Scanlan


Fri, 29 Jul at 08:32


Good Morning,


No directions have been given, the hearing is for directions to be made on the claim and further correspondence/applications received since issue.


Kind Regards,

Nic

Civil Section - Medway County Court

HMCTS

Medway County and Family Court, 9-11 The Brook, Chatham, ME4 4JZ

Phone:01634 887900

Web: www.gov.uk/hmcts

For Information regarding COVID-19 and HMCTS, please click here: COVID-19

For information on how HMCTS uses personal data about you please see: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-courts-and-tribunals-service/about/personal-information-charter




Hide original message

From: Shantanu Panigrahi <shantanupanigrahi@yahoo.com>

Sent: 29 July 2022 07:59

To: Medway County, Enquiries <enquiries.medway.countycourt@justice.gov.uk>

Cc: Orla Scanlan <orla.scanlan@blmlaw.com>

Subject: HEARING OF 27 OCTOBER 2022, 10 AM AT MEDWAY COUNTY COURT


To

The Court Manager

Medway County Court

Dear Sir/Madam


1. I was hoping to receive further clarification on the attached Directions from the Court on Claim J00ME572 (Hearing27Oct2022_10.00am.pdf) by way of an explanation because the contents are so limited in relation to what I wish to discuss at the Hearing.


2. If all issues are open for consideration at the Hearing itself, then I will of course attend the Hearing but I would appreciate if the agenda at the Hearing is outlined further point by point as follows:


(a) has jurisdiction for the Court to impose the Injunction sought against the Chief Constable of Kent Police been challenged by the Defendant or will be challenged at the Hearing? - in this regard please note that the name of the Chief Constable is not Hugh Pughesley but Alan Pughesley.


(b) will the only matter to be considered is the Defendant's application and not what has subsequently superceded the Claimant's Applications with new particulars of Claim as I have kept the Court informed on since the issue of the Notice of Issue was served on the Defendant?


(c) Will the Money Claims application be considered for jurisdiction or has jurisdiction already been accepted by the Defendant?


(d) Have the full costs of the Defendant been submitted to the Court as the document attached indicates?


(e) will any other party listed as co-conspirators by the Clamant in the Money Claims Applation be asked by the Court to submit written evidence to the Court prior to the Hearing or will this be part of the issues that are to be discussed at the Hearing for fresh new Directions?


(f) Will the Pre-action Protocol served on me by BLM Law on the Claimant but which has not been followed up by the Law Firm be part of the considerations at the Hearing, or should the Defendant be required to find another Law Firm to represent it at the Hearing due to conflict of interests inherent which requires this Law Firm to recuse itself from the proceedings?


(e) In the absence of the interim report on the investigations of alleged harassment and stalking dating back to 15 September 2021 and subsequent arrest of the Claimant on 24 November 2021 will it be required by the Court prior to the Hearing if Kent Police has still not completed its investigations on the allegations against the Claimant?


(f) What is the name of the Judge who considered the matter hitherto and Directed the attac

2 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

APOLOGISE AND PAY COMPENSATION Yahoo / Inbox Shantanu Panigrahi <shantanupanigrahi@yahoo.com> To: ccmcce-filing@justice.gov.uk, AGO Correspondence Tue, 29 Nov at 18:20 To CCMCC Attorney General Dear S

CLAIM J00ME572 Yahoo / Sent Shantanu Panigrahi <shantanupanigrahi@yahoo.com> To: Force Control Kent Police Tue, 29 Nov at 11:54 To Kent Police Dear Sirs I did not receive an acknowledgement from Medwa

Any chance of Resumption of my books Inbox Shantanu Panigrahi 10:29 (6 hours ago) Dear Lulu Have you had any second or third thoughts of letting me re-open my Account: https://www.lulu.com/spotlight/t