... no, they don't ... that's true ... but people who operate them
(And then, blame the computer!)
It's all VERY SIMPLE. IF A COMPUTER MAKES A MISTAKE ... IT AIN'T
EVEN GONNA BOOT UP! Let alone do anything else.
Why do I mention this?
The great "Permission granted" ... which turned out to be
"Permission REFUSED" furore has now been resolved ...
insofar as 'who made the mistake'.
The answer is: Someone (some lowly minion) at the Royal Courts
of Justice typed in the wrong result, initially.
And, when the Appellant rang up to learn the result of the Hearing,
she was told what the computer displayed ... which was the wrong
It wasn't until her erstwhile Representative arrived home, and told
everyone the TRUE result, via Skype, that the truth came to light.
An e-mail to her, from the RCJ says:
Of course, if the Appellant had actually gone to the Court
herself ... or even given Limited Power of Attorney to her
Representative in documented form:
were informed by Sharmin that permission for judicial review
had been granted when you called at 12.45 a.m. as, at that
time, that was the result showing on the ACO computer
database. It subsequently transpired that it was an error by
the Court Associate who had entered the result of an earlier
case. The result was rectified by the Associate during the
course of the afternoon sitting. For the avoidance of doubt
the computer record no longer shows that you have been granted
1. She may very well NOT have lost (because she had some 'pretty big
guns' on her side ... in the form of her Rep who DID turn up ...
quite capable of demolishing the other side's arguments ... which
they had already done FIVE TIMES before ... and
2. She would have known the result ... there an then.
Anyway ... giving out the wrong result ... that much ... was NOT her
fault. (And, therefore, not mine, either)