Scribd
Upload
40 views

Grimsby and Cleethorpes Magistrates' Court

This is Exhibit 19 supporting the statement of evidence in an application to start a private prosecution regarding Humberside police refusing to investigate an allegation of perjury to defraud, on the grounds that it is a Civil Matter. This is an offence pursuant to Section 26 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 as the failure to investigate causes a detriment to the defrauded taxpayer.

Uploaded by

Private Prosecution Statement of Evidence
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
40 views

Grimsby and Cleethorpes Magistrates' Court

This is Exhibit 19 supporting the statement of evidence in an application to start a private prosecution regarding Humberside police refusing to investigate an allegation of perjury to defraud, on the grounds that it is a Civil Matter. This is an offence pursuant to Section 26 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 as the failure to investigate causes a detriment to the defrauded taxpayer.

Uploaded by

Private Prosecution Statement of Evidence
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

GRIMSBY AND CLEETHORPES

Application to start a prosecution


(s1 Magistrates Courts Act 1980)

MAGISTRATES COURT
(Code 1940)

Listed: 26 April 2016

Xxxx Yyyy
Prosecution
v
Humberside Police
Defendant

EXHIBIT 19
Costs suspended until outcome letter

Justices' Clerk for Humber & South


Yorkshire
Doncaster Magistrates Court
PO Box 49
The Law Courts
College Road
Doncaster DN1 3HT

YY Xxxxx Yyyyy
Grimsby
North East Lincolnshire

13 February 2014

Dear Mrs Watts


Re: North East Lincolnshire Council V Xyxy Yxyxyx
Grimsby and Cleethorpes Magistrates' Court - 2 November
2012 Application to State a Case

Further to there being no response to my letter of 10.1.14, I am left not knowing why the justices
did not state the case in accordance with rule 78 of the Magistrates' Courts Rules 1981.
It must be assumed that the court only gave an undertaking to serve the draft case, re
acknowledgement of service (Judicial Review 8.7.13) and not intended delivering the case stated
until recognizance had been agreed.
As a consequence of the judicial review claim, I understand that despite a sum (500) being
stated in your letter (24.1.13), the appropriateness and/or the amount may be considered on
agreeing recognizance. It would appear that if this appeal is to be progressed it will be conditional
on entering into recognizance. I therefore ask that arrangements are made for this to take place
and await your response.

Yours sincerely

X. Yyyyyy

You might also like