Report comment

anon @ 10.56 - I'm sorry, I simply don't agree as far as the appeal was concerned, and the £1m costs bill the SRA is paying to LD only relates to the appeal.

Your first 2 points were decisions on specific facts (though I am not sure the SDT actually made decisions on those exact points as I do not think they were in dispute). However, the SRA were not appealing those points. The SRA was appealing the decisions of the SDT related to those facts.

The SRA failed to present any convincing argument (or any argument at all really) as to why SDT's conclusions on the charges related to those facts was wrong, such that an appellate court should interfere.

Your third point is the same as the 2:1 point. Yes, that was one tribunal member's view. It was not the view of the majority, and that view becomes the judgment that has to be appealed, with the usual provisos that an appellate court will not do so without very good reason.