GOVERNMENTS DO BUSINESS; AN OXYMORON

Governments, whatever their protestations, seem only interested in the short term. Gordon Brown`s sale of much of the country`s gold reserves at the turn of the millenium when gold was at its lowest level for twenty years is perhaps the most infamous  such decision of recent years.  The selling of supposedly underused magistrates` courts` buildings at rock bottom prices, many in prime locations in town centres, is another example although usually known only to locals in the property business.  Bow Street Magistrates` Court was not just another court.  It was perhaps, after the Old Bailey, the most famous court in the entire world. In 2005 it was sold to an Irish property developer for €25 million.  Until recently it has remained empty.  After passing through the hands of Austrian hoteliers Rudolf and Christian Ploberger it has now been acquired by a Qatar company which plans to finally convert the old monument into another luxury hotel in Central London; a hotel one might say to be fit for a prince.  The price paid was £125 million. 

The costs of so called private finance initiative initiated by the Blair Brown combo during their years of covering the cracks in our society politically,  financially, morally and spiritually are being paid for at the present time and for many years into the future.  The sale of the courts` estate is likely to prove very *profitable for most of the buyers. 

Quite simply governments have shown themselves to be hopeless at the business of business.  Heaven help us when the real negotiations begin in Brussels and I`m a lifelong brexiteer.

	*
	FOI - 91736		July 2014

Freedom of Information Request

You asked for the following information from the Ministry of Justice (MoJ):

     “(1) Which court buildings closed since May 2010 have been disposed of

(a)  on the open market and (b) through an alternative route;

(2)Which court buildings announced for closure since May 2010 have been 

      (a) disposed of and (b) not disposed of;

(3) Of those courts announced to be closing since May 2010 that have been disposed of; and how much has been generated in capital receipts from their disposal.”

Your request has been handled under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA).

I can confirm that the department holds information that you have asked for, and I am pleased to provide this to you in the annex to this letter. Table 1 provides information on court buildings disposed of since May 2010 on the open market and through alternative routes and the receipts generated. Table 2 provides information on court buildings announced for closure since May 2010 that have not yet been disposed of.

 Annex

Table 1: Court buildings closed since May 2010 that have been disposed of, their disposal method and the receipt generated

Property Name	Disposal Method	Receipt
Aberaeron Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£225,000
Aberdare Magistrates' and County Court	Open Market	£275,000
Abertillery Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£81,000
Acton Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£1,171,650
Alnwick Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£20,000
Ammanford Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£90,000
Ashford Magistrates' and County Court	Open Market	£375,000
Balham Youth Court	Open Market	£2,000,000
Barking and Dagenham Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£505,000
Barry Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£250,000
Barnsley Crown Court	Open Market	£170,000
Batley & Dewsbury  Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£300,000
Blandford Forum Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£175,000
Blaydon Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£145,000
Brentford Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£650,000
Bristol Magistrates Court	Open Market	£1,800,000
Camborne Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£137,500
Cardigan Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£48,909
Carmarthen CC	Open Market	£275,000
Coalville Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£245,000
Consett County Court	Open Market	£125,000
Cromer Magistrates Court	Open Market	£325,000
Daventry Magistrates Court	Open Market	£140,000
Denbigh Magistrates Court	Special Purchaser Sale to Denbigh Town Council	£165,000
Dewsbury County Court	Open Market	£278,000
Didcot Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£400,000
Ely Magistrates' Court	Special Purchaser Sale to Ely Council	£1
Gosforth Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£378,000
Guisborough Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£275,000
Halesowen Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£315,000
Haringey Magistrates	Open Market	£10,100,000
Harrow Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£1,125,000
Harwich MC	Open Market	£352,500
Hemel Hempstead Magistrates' Court	Special Purchaser Sale to Dacorum Borough Council	£650,000
Hexham Magistrates' Court	Special Purchaser Sale to Hexham Abbey	£102,500
Ilford County Court	Open Market	£1,313,013
Ilkeston Magistrates' Court	Special Purchaser Sale to Derby College	£610,000
Ipswich Crown Curt	Open Market	£360,000
Keighley Crown Court	Open Market	£130,000
Knowsley Magistrates Court	Open Market	£250,000
Launceston Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£87,500
Liskeard Magistrates Court	Open Market	£380,000
Llandrindrod Wells Magistrates Court	Open Market	£34,400
Llwynypia Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£471,010
Market Harborough Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£291,500
Melton Mowbray MC/CC		£147,000
Neath Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£450,000
Newark Magistrates' and County Court	Special Purchaser Sale to Newark College	£405,000
Newport Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£59,000
Newport Magistrates' Court (Gold Tops)	Open Market	£380,000
Northwich Magistrates' and County Court	Open Market	£260,000
Penrith Magistrates' and County Court	Open Market	£175,000
Penzance County Court	Open Market	£230,000
Pontypool Crown Court	Open Market	£200,000
Port Talbot	Open Market	£225,000
Pwllheli Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£131,101
Rawtenstall Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£135,000
Redditch Crown Court	Open Market	£345,000
Retford Magistrates Court	Open Market	£151,000
Rugby Magistrates' and County Court	Open Market	£285,000
Salford Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£544,000
Sandbach (HMCS Offices)	Open Market	£200,000
Southport Magistrates Court	Open Market	£304,000
Sittingbourne Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£430,000
Sudbury Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£112,000
Sutton Coldfield Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£440,000
Sutton Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£2,247,000
Swaffham Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£150,000
Tamworth Magistrates' and County Court	Special Purchaser Sale to Staffordshire County Council	£437,500
Tower Bridge Magistrates Court	Open Market	£8,525,000
Thetford Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£232,500
Wareham MC	Open Market	£290,000
West Bromwich Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£165,000
Whitehaven Magistrates Court	Open Market	£200,000
Wisbech Magistrates Court	Open Market	£150,000
Witney Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£330,000
Woking Magistrates' Court	Special Purchaser Sale to Surrey County Council	£1,050,000
Woolwich Magistrates' Court	Open Market	£335,000
Grays Magistrates' Court	Lease Surrender	n/a
Llangefni Magistrates' Court	Lease Surrender	n/a
Total		£47,317,584

Note: A "special Purchaser Sale" is where the eventual buyer was identified at a very early stage in the pre-marketing process as a 'special purchaser'. 

Table 2: Court buildings announced for closure since May 2010 that have not yet been disposed of

Property Name	Current Position
Bournemouth Magistrates Court	Not yet on the market
Bishop Auckland Magistrates & County Court	Under Offer
Bracknell Magistrates Court	Not yet on the market
Bridgeport Magistrates' Court	Under Offer
Bridgwater Magistrates’ Court	On the Market
Burton-upon-Trent County Court	On the Market
Cirencester Magistrates’ Court	On the Market
Coleford Magistrates’ Court	Not yet on the market
Dorking Magistrates' Court	Contract Exchanged
Epping Magistrates’ Court	Under Offer
Flint Magistrates' Court	Not yet on the market
Frome Magistrates' Court	Contract Exchanged
Goole Magistrates' Court	On the Market
Haywards Heath Magistrates' Court	Contract Exchanged
Honiton Magistrates’ Court	On the Market
Houghton Le Spring Magistrates' Court	Under Offer
Houghton Le Spring The Ville	On the Market
Keighley Magistrates' Court	On the Market
Lewes Magistrates’ Court	Contract Exchanged
Lyndhurst Magistrates’ Court	Not yet on the market
Market Drayton Magistrates' Court	On the Market
Oswestry Magistrates' Court & County Court	Not yet on the market
Pontefract Magistrates’ Court	On the Market
Rochdale Magistrates’ Court	Contract Exchanged
Sherbourne Magistrates' Court	On the Market
Selby Magistrates’ Court	On the Market
Stoke-on-Trent Magistrates’ Court	On the Market
Totnes Magistrates’ Court	On the Market
Towcester Magistrates' Court	Not yet on the Market
Wantage Magistrates Court	Contract Exchanged
Wimborne Magistrates' Court	Under Offer
Witham Magistrates Court	Under Offer
Weston Super Mare Magistrates Court	Not yet on the market

FIRST HEARINGS AT VIRTUAL COURTS

During my time on the bench the main use of video appearances was for bail applications from remand prisoners.  Virtual courts are now common place as I understand.  What I hadn`t realised was the burden upon defence lawyers when such procedures are in place.  Law Society guidance published earlier this year is quite an eye opener.  Just as landlords and estate agencies under recent legislation have had thrust upon them a duty of establishing a prospective tenant`s right of abode in the UK or hospitals` requirement to undertake similar checks on foreign patients the onus has been placed upon lawyers to ascertain situations with which they might feel less than comfortable or indeed competent. When these additional tasks are combined with the meagre fees of legal aid it is no surprise that there is a danger of the process being given less than 100% attention.  The explosion in numbers and responsibilities of "agencies" at arms length control of government and duties placed upon third parties in order for said governments to evade direct responsibilities is a blight on all of us. 

WITNESS [IDENTITY WITHHELD] FOR THE PROSECUTION

A blog which has been around for as long as I have or longer; The Defence Brief, has today published information which should be read by all who are interested in the criminal law and the attempts to diminish rights of the individual within that context.

LATE NIGHT PISS UP IN CHESTER

There are some factors in the ladder of life that hit home only when one reaches the upper rungs. One of the most telling is the apparent shrinkage of the human bladder. In common with many of my generation I have found that when one is away from home and notices the proximity of an apparently clean and well ordered public lavatory one makes use of the facility whether or not in urgent need. Most J.P.s have adjudicated on cases involving this ultimate human requirement to urinate in inappropriate places. Rarely in my experience have offenders been of the retired variety: more often than not they have been of the young and inebriated variety. They can be summonsed on a variety of charges and sometimes one can but feel the utmost sympathy for such individuals…….there but for the grace of god go I. The provision of town or city centre facilities when the pubs close is variable to say the least as are the obviously unpleasant results of such variability.

Chester City Management are trying to civilise the situation within normal shopping hours whereby the public can use the facilities at various retail establishments without the need to purchase anything or to be made an object of embarrassment. But all is not free flowing and unfortunately for late might revellers the story is not quite the same. But instead of being in the dock at the local magistrates` court a few years ago the powers that be  devised an out of court disposal that they hoped would act as a deterrent to future bladder incontinence; a walking tour of those areas favoured by late night public excreters. It seems that disposal has been disposed of. But the great British, in this case, Chester public, doesn`t take such discomforts lying down.

COMPUTER SAYS GUILTY

Yesterday I posted on proposed new sentencing guidelines on breach of court orders and in particular breach occurring whilst an offender is under a suspended sentence order.  My conclusion was that the greatly increased minutia of the sentencing structure has allowed sentencing per se to have become almost a tick box exercise, such a philosophy having supposedly been considered and rejected when Sentencing Guidelines was first published.  With a lay bench of three magistrates there is always the possibility of a single voice suggesting a variation from the guidelines when there is sufficient reason to back up such a  proposal.  When a District Judge (MC) is presiding that option is removed.  A recent development is for a single magistrate to sit alone in an office albeit with a legal advisor in simple matters which do not have a possible custodial outcome and are generally strict liability.  My initial comment on that scenario is the difficulty that that J.P. might find if for whatever reason within lawful boundaries s/he has a different opinion from the L/A on outcome especially with some L/As tending to advise to or sometimes beyond the limits of their responsibilities. Considering the trend over the last decade it does not appear to be fanciful to predict the possibility of a non human digital approach to trial and sentencing.  Verdicts of the European Court of Human Rights have been subjected to analyses which predicted verdicts of a computer accurately in 79% of cases. It is only a matter of a generation before such artificial intelligences become even more a part of our daily life.  Who is to say that those advances will not include interaction with current legal processes.