Page 227 - Pages from 8. 2017 New 26-05-21 No Table- 2nd Half

the case would go ahead without his presence. The
Appellant then discharged himself from hospital, because he
had no choice. He was extremely unwell: --
On this date the Interim Antisocial Behaviour Order was
granted by the District Judge Newham. Upon delivering her
judgment, District Judge Newham ruled that it is just to
impose an Interim Antisocial Behaviour Order, and that
regard had been taken of The Appellant's Article 6 and 8
rights, as well as The Appellants business. District Judge
Newham ruled that there are no provisions contained within
the (amended) proposed Interim Antisocial Behaviour Order
which would prevent The Appellant from conducting
legitimate business. On this date all police officers were due
to attend. They did not attend their reason was they were not
told to attend; this was untrue as the application from
22/10/2014
should still stand as the case had only been adjourned until
this date for the Interim Antisocial Behaviour Order hearing)
The applicant’s case also relied solely on hearsay,
Magistrate’s Courts (hearsay evidence in civil proceeding)
rules 1999. These are the conditions The Appellant was
placed under and are for the whole of the UK:
The defendant is prohibited from: --
Attending a rave as defined by s.63(1) of the criminal justice
and public order act 1994; Being concerned in the
organisation of a rave as defined by s.63(1) of the criminal
justice and public order act 1994; Knowingly using or
supplying property, personal or otherwise, for use in a rave
as defined by s.63(1) of the criminal justice and public order
act 1994; Entering or remaining in any disused or abandoned
building unless invited to do so in writing by a registered
charitable organisation; Entering or remaining on non-
residential private property on an industrial estate between
the hours of 10pm and 7am without written permission from
the owner and/or leaseholder of the property; and Engaging,
in any licensable activity’s, in any unlicensed premises. For
the sake of clarity, nothing in this order prevents the
defendant from assisting, preparing for, or engaging in
licensed licensable activities. This is untrue as we have
since contacted council and police and told he would not be
granted a licence to hold any events as long as the Antisocial
Behaviour Order was in place. So, The Appellant’s
entertainment business is seriously affected by the Antisocial
Behaviour Order that was put in place. Points to address
regarding the conditions The Appellant is prohibited from
doing. Attending a rave as defined by s.63(1) of the criminal
justice and public order act 1994; Being concerned in the
organisation of a rave as defined by s.63(1) of the criminal
justice and public order act 1994; Knowingly using or
supplying property, personal or otherwise, for use in a rave