Markham Posted November 5, 2011 Author Posted November 5, 2011 The news article indicated that the case is being prepared. That is a long ways from being filed or accepted. It also indicated that the information was provided to them by Santos's lawyer not by any lawyers in the UK.British lawyers do not enjoy the same freedom as do their Philippine counterparts where the press is concerned and in any case, this is a story that only has relevance in the Philippines. It would be of no interest to a British readership. As I understand it, the international Defence Team - comprising of lawyers in Cebu, Makati and London, researchers and maybe Public Relations practitioners who specialise in litigation support - operates as one cohesive unit for both Griffiths and Santos. I think there's a very good chance that the Writs have already been prepared since the likelihood of such action was hinted some months ago. There is no need to file the cases with the High Court, merely to have them "sealed" (literally with a wax seal) but that's an administrative rather than legal function performed by the Clerks Office for which a fee is payable. The High Court only officially "knows" about the case(s) when the Plaintiffs' lawyer makes a Listings Request - an application for the case(s) to be tried - and that can't happen until the Writs are served and the response period (of around 60 days) has elapsed. So yes, it is highly unlikely that those civil cases would be heard before Santos' trial is over - assuming the Judge agrees to a "marathon hearing" which is almost unheard of. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garpo Posted November 5, 2011 Posted November 5, 2011 My point is that a threat of a civil case can go both ways! That is why and what I meant that I was not sure that a civil case would be such a good idea on the part of Griffiths or Santos lawyers. I would think that they would be better off to let the criminal case or cases play out before they start throwing threats of civil action around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garpo Posted November 5, 2011 Posted November 5, 2011 Mark, I understand why and how Griffiths can file a case in the UK courts, but, I don't see how Santos can unless she is a UK citizen. I honestly do not know that much about UK laws and courts so maybe you can explain it to me and others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markham Posted November 5, 2011 Author Posted November 5, 2011 I wonder if it is possible for the victims family to file a civil wrongful death case against Griffiths and Santos? Something like what happened to OJ Simpson. He was found not guilty in the criminal murder case but lost the civil case filed by the victims families. I would guess that civil cases can go both ways. Theoretically I guess they could. But there are practical issues which they would need to overcome and the most immediate would be their ability, or lack of, to fund such a case. I would be very surprised if they could find a lawyer prepared to take it on either pro bono or on a "no fix no fee" basis. Then there'd be the rather insurmountable problem of including Griffiths as a defendant. And what if they lost, the damages and costs awarded against them would be massive. The foregoing assumes the case is filed in Cebu; were the family to attempt to file it in London, their difficulties and costs spiral exponentially. But if they were to win around ten million on Lotto they might stand a chance of bringing such a case to court. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markham Posted November 5, 2011 Author Posted November 5, 2011 Mark, I understand why and how Griffiths can file a case in the UK courts, but, I don't see how Santos can unless she is a UK citizen. I honestly do not know that much about UK laws and courts so maybe you can explain it to me and others.Santos is a co-Plaintiff along with Griffiths. As far as I can make out, anyone can ask the High Court in London to try a civil case; in the UK Justice is blind to race, colour, creed and nationality. The only requirement is that the case must be argued by a lawyer who has "right of appearance", in other words, a English Barrister or Queen's Counsel. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garpo Posted November 6, 2011 Posted November 6, 2011 Well since I am and never have been a big fan of lawyers, I can again say that in my opinion, the only real winners in civil cases are usually the lawyers. Lets just see how the criminal case or cases turn out and then I doubt we will even have to read or hear about any civil case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markham Posted November 6, 2011 Author Posted November 6, 2011 Well since I am and never have been a big fan of lawyers, I can again say that in my opinion, the only real winners in civil cases are usually the lawyers. Lets just see how the criminal case or cases turn out and then I doubt we will even have to read or hear about any civil case. Maybe that is true in the US. In the UK, however, lawyers can not peg their fees as a percentage of the award and "no fix, no fee" is also a no-no. There are two distinct kinds of law practitioner in the UK. Solicitors who are instructed by clients but they are only able to argue cases in certain lower courts such as Magistrates Courts which deal with petty offenders. If a case needs to go to trial, the Solicitor will engage the services of a Barrister who argues the case in court. Barristers never deal with clients direct, only through his Solicitor. A serious case may involve several Barristers one of whom may be a Queen's Counsel (QC) - a senior and very experienced Barrister. Unlike many Solicitors, Barristers almost always specialise in one particular aspect of Law - such as Marine, Divorce, Libel, Murder etc. So you think the civil cases will never happen? Interesting. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garpo Posted November 6, 2011 Posted November 6, 2011 (edited) I don't feel that a civil case will ever go to trial. Most lawyers in the US are also paid an hourly rate or will charge a flat rate depending on the type of case. Edited November 6, 2011 by Garpo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markham Posted November 6, 2011 Author Posted November 6, 2011 If none of the Respondents named in the civil case file a defence or counter-claim, then there would be no trial. There would, however, be a short one-day hearing at which damages and costs would be assessed and awarded to Griffiths who would win by default. One London libel lawyer (a Solicitor) charges £400 an hour (about $600) for his time. But then he is very skilful and manages to get huge out-of-court settlements for his clients. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garpo Posted November 6, 2011 Posted November 6, 2011 The lawyers in the UK have to charge so much in order to pay for those silly white wigs they wear :) Any civil case will most likely be put on hold until all the criminal proceedings are concluded. A reward for damages and costs by default in the UK is a long ways from getting anybody in the Philippines to cough up any money. I would suspect that people in the Philippines will pretty much just ignore and and laugh off any civil action filed in the UK. If Griffiths or Santos really expected to win and collect anything then they should file the case in the Philippines. But I suspect that Griffiths is not in any hurry to leave the UK right now......... If I read the media reports correctly, his job is in Singapore which must be difficult for him to make any money himself to pay for his legal fees. I believe that his money would be much more wisely spent on his criminal lawyers than on a civil action that he could file at a later time. Wining a civil case and lots of money will do him no good if he is sitting in a prison somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts