The problem at today's hearing appeared to be that the Judge would not let our man, Joe, represent Julia.
She had failed to supply a limited Power of Attorney, in Joe's favour, as her litigant.
And she didn't show up herself.
Therefore, basically, it was just a private discussion between the Judge and the Land Registry Barrister (Sheehan). (Result would be a forgone conclusion in that circumstance)
Everything that was discussed was easily rebuttable (by Joe), but there was no-one there to do the rebutting. (Because Joe, presumably, was forced to stand there, unable to speak ... after the Judge had refused him permission ... absent a presented Power of Attorney)
Judge also refused adjournment - initially asked for on the basis that Solicitors weren't able to attend that day. The Judge refused on the grounds that 'there was no evidence' that Solicitors had agreed to act for Julia in this particular matter.
(And then, to cap it all, we were initially told she'd won!!!)
No ... we need to do just a little bit better than that. All for the sake of a ONE LINE E-Mail to Joe, last night, giving him Limited Power of Attorney.
And the problem is that, if anyone else makes the same Application ... it will now be batted out immediately on the basis of this refusal.
This is THE BIG problem with Lawful Rebellion. TO MAKE SURE THAT - WHATEVER YOU DO - YOU DON'T FUCK UP - FOR OTHERS - IF YOU LOSE. It all comes down to HAVING THE RIGHT MINDSET ... and everything marshalled and in place ... before you start.
Anyway ... apologies once again.