The UK’s judges are a law unto themselves, they are unregulated masters of their own destiny and many are failing to act according to the law. Spoliation of evidence, meaning the intentional or reckless disregard of evidence in proceedings is the method of choice for many. Evidence, facts and points of law are often disregarded to favour one side.
Many judges in the UK are inventing their own versions of the law or acting to deliberately misrepresent laws and legal precedents and the courts are being used as vehicles from which to achieve injustice. Cash cows for the large corporate law firms and their regular service users who are more often carry greater preference than the newcomer to the particular jurisdiction. A form of bias founded by human instinct that again conflicts with the principle of natural justice.
There may not be so much bribery in the direct form, but it is happening. What is rife and widespread is where the UK’s judges are acting in ways that violate the principles of natural justice and as such, are violating people’s rights to a fair trial. The laws are good, the problem is with the ones that are upholding the laws.
The regulator does not regulate:
Judicial misconduct diminishes the public’s trust in the judiciary and the rule of law. As if it is engineered deliberately in such a way, the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (“JCIO”) have limited their scope of investigation to the extent that they fail to deal with the prolific judicial misconduct, such as spoilation of evidence or violations of the principle of natural justice, acting in situations of perceived or actual bias.
The headline of the JCIO website is that;
“We cannot accept complaints about a judge’s decision or the way a judge has managed a case”
Yet, more often than not, it is the way the judge has managed the case that leads to injustice and in most cases, the wrongdoing is founded by favour.
The scope of the JCIO’s “investigatory” capability is limited to;
–The use of racist, sexist or offensive language
–Falling asleep in court
–Inappropriate use of social media
–Misusing judicial status for personal gain or advantage
In reality these four narrow criteria occurring are a rarity. The JCIO officers are not legally trained, they do not have the capability to address the wider issues of day to day judicial misconduct that prevails through all of our courts and so therefore the judges, who are well aware of the lack of capability of the regulators, can get away with judicial misconduct completely unpunished in the knowledge that the JCIO will reject any complaint that comes to them that falls outside the criteria.
It is our view that the JCIO is an absolute abuse of the public’s trust and a misuse of public funds. Their staff are arrogant and unhelpful, they do not do what they purport to do and in essence deceive the public into belief that there is a judicial regulator when in reality there is not. The ones at the top of the Ministry of Justice food chain must be held to account.
Police are instructed to refuse to investigate any allegation of criminality leveled against a judge and to advise the complainant to refer their complaint back to the JCIO, a cycle that leads to nowhere. Hence, judges in the UK are unaccountable and unregulated, or they were until more recently.
Intelligence UK is here to bridge the gap, to investigate judicial misconduct on an impartial basis and to take action as a private agency to target the perpetrators in a way disassociated with common purpose public regulators that often “cover for the other”.
We are here to act in the public interest, to restore the rule of law and to hold judges that engage in misconduct to account in the criminal courts or by means of public exposure for their wrongdoings. A major driver of judicial misconduct is not only the lack of regulation, but also the lack of exposure when judges have done wrong. Freedom of the press is compromised, so we aim to bridge the gap with the imminent launch of our own platform to expose the judicial wrongdoers.
In the Supreme Court case of Cape Intermediate Holdings Ltd -v- Dring (for and on behalf of Asbestos Victims Support Groups Forum UK)  UKSC 38. It was cited that: “The constitutional principle of open justice applies to all courts and tribunals exercising the judicial power of the state”
Rule 5.4C of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) provides that a person who is not a party to proceedings may obtain from the court records copies of a statement of case and judgment or orders made in public, and, if the court gives permission, ‘obtain from the records of the court a copy of any other document filed by a party, or communication between the court and a party or another person’. In practice however, this does not provide the level of transparency required, because there are very few who would pay the prescribed fee to inspect a case just out of interest.
There needs to be more transparency:
There is a cure for corruption and that is, most certainly, transparency. If there is genuine fear of being exposed in the public domain for an act of judicial misconduct or corruption, public pressure will force the hand of law enforcement to act. That fear will instill the respect for authority that is completely lacking in the current judicial arena.
Journalists have absolute privilege and it would further the principle of open justice to have judges that engage in misconduct or corruption exposed internationally in the public domain over the internet. The issue is, that freedom of the UK’s press is vastly compromised, so we need to do it as an independent publisher and specialist agency dedicated to combatting domestic corruption. It is the lack of transparency or ability of the public to scrutinise judicial decisions conflicts with the principle of open justice that is primary cause of the constitutional crisis and break down of the rule of law in the UK.
The right to self-determination under the rule of law is the very fabric of the liberty of our society, yet one cannot self-determine any decision that is concealed. Transparency the ability of the public to monitor how well justice is being served is the key and that door is opened by advocation of that constitutional principle of open natural justice.
The right to self-determination and the right to scrutinise the public official and the public authority is a birthright gift of every UK citizen. Our common law jurisdiction was designed that way, to enable accountability, openness, transparency, honesty and integrity. The fundamental principles set out by the late Lord Nolan known as the 7 principles of public life that is the pre-requisite duty of every public servant to adhere to. Again, many do not, because the regulators are failing to regulate. It is the failures of the regulators and the lack of regulation and accountability that is the driver of misfeasance, nonfeasance and injustices.
In the case of the judiciary, there are no regulators, only other judges who simply fail to do so. Judges defend one another and will not find against a fellow member of their fraternity unless they are forced to by public exposure or profile of a case. Now, there is a solution, the Intelligence UK solution.
Insolvency law is being used as a license to defraud – the sector is unregulated
The insolvency sector is entirely unregulated and its practitioners, for the most part, see administration of the insolvent estate as a license to print money. The legal framework, being the Insolvency Act 1986 and the Insolvency Rules 2016 is comprehensive, however, those tasked with administering the laws in practice, fail to do so.
The principal duty of the fiduciary trustee in insolvency, both corporate and individual is to act at all times in the interests of the body of creditors and the estate generally to recover assets belonging to the estate, to investigate the affairs of the insolvent estate in the public interest and to realise assets belonging to the estate at fair value, distributing a dividend to the legitimate creditors to minimise loss incurred through the insolvency. Any surplus, after payment of the legitimately incurred trustee costs in administration of the estate is distributed to the contributories / members or the bankrupt.
A trustee / liquidator has a duty to act with a high degree of care and skill and must maintain his / her independence and impartiality at all times. The renowned authority in Keech v Sandford  EWHC J76, derives from trust law, on the fiduciary duty of loyalty and independence Lord Macclesfield had previously held that a fiduciary trustee was entitled to take money from a trust, invest it on their own behalf, and keep the profit, if they restored money to the trust. Keech reversed that, and ever since the rule of law internationally has maintained a strict opposition to any possibility of a conflict of interest. The two lead authorities arise from the judgment:
– A trustee may not profiteer from his trusteeship whatsoever;
– A trustee owes a strict duty of loyalty so that there can never be a possibility of any conflict of interest.
It is our view, after dozens of cases we have investigated, that the Insolvency Service, the industry’s only regulator is rotten to the core with corrupt practices and members who work covertly to assist unscrupulous lawyers and private insolvency practitioners (“IP”) in abusing the legislation to make often disproportionate gains through the administration of the role of the fiduciary trustee. The conduct is unlawful and yet scrutiny of the fees being applied by the IP is often made beyond reach of those affected by the insolvency, including creditors. There is a need to encourage and advocate transparency and to investigate the sector has a whole. Without an independent regulator that operates with integrity, the sector has become a law unto itself and the courts support and are are generally biased in favour of the IP, who acts as an affectual officer of the court in administration of their role. They are given far too much power, with absolutely no regulation or come back, so the abuse prevails.
Intelligence UK – Getting you back on track
Insolvency investigation services
Intelligence UK has broad experience in investigating complex and high profile corporate and personal insolvency cases. We have forged long term mutually beneficial relationships with leading counsel associates who synergise perfectly with our investigatory strategy. We have the capability to privately prosecute, both in the civil courts and criminally where there is misconduct on the part of insolvency office holders.
We specialise in asset recovery, often achieving results for creditors where insolvency practitioners have failed through either lack of willing or inability.
Get in touch with us today to find out how we may be able to help. Simply email us with your enquiry to email@example.com.
Preserving the creditor’s position & asset recovery
Our extensive experience of fraud investigation, asset-tracing and specialisation in insolvency law enables us to provide expert assistance, acting fast, getting to the root of the issues, reducing costs and delays for our clients whilst maximising the chances of securing evidence and recovering assets.
Often there is a way out and most often, we have found that there are ways of getting back into control. Sometimes the boundary to achieving success is a conflicting position or motive between a creditor and the insolvency practitioner.
We apply our forensic minds and substantial knowledge of the sector to create and execute the strategy. We create court ready reports for lawyers and the clients we work with directly, saving substantially on time and money by getting to the heart of the issues, delivering successful outcomes and consolidating the arguments to perfect litigation strategy.
The first step towards getting somewhere is to decide you’re not going to stay where you are.
– J.P Morgan
Insolvency law is widely being used as the vehicle of choice for white collar criminals in defrauding their victims. Whether by taking away standing to bring litigation by misuse of insolvency legislation or whether by using insolvency and fictitious claims and misapplied, often accentuated fees, we have identified a massive problem in the insolvency sector and there is urgent need of reform.
With an in-depth understanding of cross-disciplinary best practices, Intelligence UK is inter-connected across jurisdictions and regulatory fronts, enabling us to carry out multi-jurisdictional investigations and hit issues head on wherever they arise.
Intelligence UK is making a 12-part documentary series exposing the UK’s out of control systemic corruption and identifying the perpetrators in judicial, public and ministerial office. Be sure to like and follow us on our Youtube Channel.