Report comment

Scep Tick. You are really living up to your name. The Judgment reveals that the solicitor acting for the FRP had written previously to the SDT advising of his client's mental health problems, and his own inability to obtain instructions as a result.
There is absolutely no question that FRP fell "ill right before a hearing.." On the contrary he had been ill for some time.
Neither is there any evidence that he made any remarkable recovery.
There is a substantial difference between being able to attend a hearing, give evidence and withstand cross-examination, and being able to ask one solicitor to lodge an appeal agains a "decision that was unjust, and is wrong"