Page 159 - 7. 2016 Last three months the 10 - 11 - 12 No Table

particulars had been given, in respect to the complaints made and developed by
them self’s which are all concealed within the Antisocial Behaviour Order
(ASBO) application, in turn knowingly and deliberately while intentionally
misusing his or hers and their powers of conduct, while and with complete
disregard for law and associated regulations, to aid in a manner to which was
reckless and caused extreme disregard for the applicants and other human life’s,
creating a breach of many human rights as some are listed within this document
in accordance towards the relevant issues of concern in regards to accountably
breaches. The rights to respect for each person(s) Human right “Articles” are of
fundamental importance. Any invasion of the rights must be strongly justified.
All “public authorities” for the purposes of the Human Rights Act 1998, are
directly subject to the legal obligation imposed by section 6 of that Act to act
compatibly with Convention rights, the state cannot discharge its obligations
under ECHR Article 8 in relation to the retention and storage of data.
ASBO is disproportionate: -
The applicant states that the Antisocial Behaviour Order (ASBO) is
disproportionate and it prevents him from engaging in lawful business. The
Antisocial Behaviour Order (ASBO) prevents the applicant from applying for
licenses to hold events within each local council’s boroughs, without alerting
each individual council of the
462,
offence imposed upon himself, named “The organising of illegal raves” being
present as a convection, as this is relevant to the information required by the local
councils as for the nature of the offence.
Any other person(s) would be treated different and would not have to sit on an
official special committee at a board room meeting in relation to each different
ward licensing that is being applied for due to this convection, as the applicant
now has to do because of the similarity of the offence that is being put towards
the application for event licensing.
An Antisocial Behaviour Order (ASBO) order must not be classed as a criminal
record as procedure rules and the guidance applied states, but due to the
description of the respondent’s accusations all rules do not legally comply.
And due to this the applicant has emailed each individual council; ward and was
put in receipt information by each relevant department, the official documents
raise the issue of concern regarding a statement dated 10/02/2016 what was
written by Miss Lorraine Cordell, which a no fault of the applicants own, does
not seem to be in the Appellant’s Bundle and clearly should have been, which
proves the fact that a mutable amount of calls was made by Miss Lorraine
Cordell in seeking a response from Local councils and police forces licensing
teams, so to obtain information stating weather the Appellant would be able to
get licensing for events he wanted to manage, the reply back (please read
enclosed statement as exhibit sc1 )
The Appellant who is in receipt of the official documents received will state that
it has been explained by all councils that whilst he is subject to an ASBO order
relating to the entertainment industry he will be prohibited from applying for any
entertainment licence and any licence application will automatically fail and
therefore this is disproportionate. The applicants mother did an updated statement
that is dated 10/02/2016 the reason being due to what was written within the
Skeleton Argument for the Respondent: Page 5 section 20:
“As to the particular prohibitions endorsed upon the applicant and the respondent