On 1/12/2022 9:38 PM, Jethro_uk wrote:
1) Assuming he chooses not to take the stand, unlike a criminal case,
it can be held against him ?
2) If he were to take the stand, would his testimony be subject to
perjury laws and lay him open to a criminal charge if he was found to
be economical with the actualite ?
3) Assuming judgement is awarded against him, what options are
available to a US court under any US-UK treaties ?
I hope these are general enough to not be sub judice :)
1. Yes. In a civil case, failure to take the stand can be remarked on by
the opposing lawyer and the jury can take it into consideration.
2. If he takes the stand and testifies falsely, he would be subject to perjury laws.
3. If he owns property in the United States, Giuffre can levy against
it. Whether she can reach property in the UK or elsewhere is an open question.
This is a big black eye for the Royal Family. I would be surprised if
they don't settle out of court "for an undisclosed sum", unless Prince
Andrew has a strong defense. Maybe even if he does.
From reading it seems the plaintiff has also asked for proof of this extraordinary claim to be submitted to the court ?
1) Assuming he chooses not to take the stand, unlike a criminal case,
it can be held against him ?
2) If he were to take the stand, would his testimony be subject to
perjury laws and lay him open to a criminal charge if he was found to
be economical with the actualite ?
3) Assuming judgement is awarded against him, what options are
available to a US court under any US-UK treaties ?
I hope these are general enough to not be sub judice :)
1) Assuming he chooses not to take the stand, unlike a criminal case, it
can be held against him ?
2) If he were to take the stand, would his testimony be subject to
perjury laws and lay him open to a criminal charge if he was found to be >economical with the actualite ?
3) Assuming judgement is awarded against him, what options are available
to a US court under any US-UK treaties ?
The UK does not have a treaty on recognition of US judgments.
David Spencer <spencer@panix.com> wrote:
The UK does not have a treaty on recognition of US judgments.
The UK and the US are both signatories to the Hague Convention of
Enforcement of Judgments.
https://www.hcch.net/en/instruments/conventions/full-text/?cid=137
Stuart O. Bronstein wrote:
David Spencer <spencer@panix.com> wrote:
The UK does not have a treaty on recognition of US judgments.
The UK and the US are both signatories to the Hague Convention of
Enforcement of Judgments.
https://www.hcch.net/en/instruments/conventions/full-text/?cid=137
I wouldn't rely on that these days. The UK is a bit pick'n'mix
when it comes to international treaties.
At this point I'm curious about the process of identifying and
seizing any assets the defendant might have in the US. Would a US
court order be sufficient for a UK court to assist in the matter ?
It would be inconceivable that someone of his standing would not
have a myriad of disparate investments - probably unknown even to
themselves in detail. So some could well be inside the US and
under US jurisdiction.
Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
Stuart O. Bronstein wrote:
David Spencer <spencer@panix.com> wrote:
The UK does not have a treaty on recognition of US judgments.
The UK and the US are both signatories to the Hague Convention of
Enforcement of Judgments.
https://www.hcch.net/en/instruments/conventions/full-text/?cid=137
I wouldn't rely on that these days. The UK is a bit pick'n'mix when it
comes to international treaties.
At this point I'm curious about the process of identifying and seizing
any assets the defendant might have in the US. Would a US court order
be sufficient for a UK court to assist in the matter ?
It would be inconceivable that someone of his standing would not have a
myriad of disparate investments - probably unknown even to themselves
in detail. So some could well be inside the US and under US
jurisdiction.
The way it normally works is that, when you have a court order from one jurisdiction, you take it to another jurisdiction and you file a lawsuit there, based on the judgment. The only issue in that case will be
whether you have a valid judgment from the other jurisdiction. So it's
not a trivial exercise - on occasion (but not often) a court will decide that, for some reason, the other court's judgment isn't valid and won't
be enforced.
In the US this process has to be done in every state where a defendant
has assets. But it's a bit easier than at the international level,
because in the US each state is required to give "full faith and credit"
to the laws and judgments of every other state.
But that doesn't mean that the judgement of one state is always
recognized by the courts of another state. See the famous cases of
Williams v. North Carolina:
https://dspace2.creighton.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10504/40270/17_ 32CreightonLRev187(1998-1999).pdf?sequence=1
On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 06:23:10 -0800, Stuart O. Bronstein wrote:
David Spencer <spencer@panix.com> wrote:
The UK does not have a treaty on recognition of US judgments.
The UK and the US are both signatories to the Hague Convention of
Enforcement of Judgments.
https://www.hcch.net/en/instruments/conventions/full-text/?cid=137
I wouldn't rely on that these days. The UK is a bit pick'n'mix when it
comes to international treaties.
David Spencer <spencer@panix.com> wrote:
The UK does not have a treaty on recognition of US judgments.
The UK and the US are both signatories to the Hague Convention of
Enforcement of Judgments.
https://www.hcch.net/en/instruments/conventions/full-text/?cid=137
1) Assuming he chooses not to take the stand, unlike a criminal case, it
can be held against him ?
2) If he were to take the stand, would his testimony be subject to
perjury laws and lay him open to a criminal charge if he was found to be economical with the actualite ?
3) Assuming judgement is awarded against him, what options are available
to a US court under any US-UK treaties ?
I hope these are general enough to not be sub judice :)
(posting from the land of tyrants :) )
The latest news is that Mr. Windsor is seeking a jury trial in this case.
4) Is this possible ?
5) Would he be able to appear remotely, or would the court be able to
mandate his presence before proceeding ?
6) Does this move require the plaintiffs side to provide some sort of
surety in the event they lose to cover any costs (which might act as a >potential barrier to progress).
7) With respect to the photograph of the plaintiff and Mr. Windsor. Does
the court require Mr. Windsor to "recognize" it in order for it to be >accepted. Or does res ipsos loquitor :) ?
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 251 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 48:22:30 |
| Calls: | 5,557 |
| Files: | 11,680 |
| Messages: | 5,118,411 |