R-City Cape Town is a new organisation that has been launched in Bonteheuwel. A new organisation that was launched in Bonteheuwel aims to bring transformation to the area and let the youth lead the way.R-City Cape Town was launched with much fanfare outside its base in Honeysuckle Road, on Saturday January 5, with locals and guests from its sister organisation, R-City Belfast, in Northern Ireland.Pastor Norman Jacobs, from Beautiful Exchange Church, where R-City is based, said he had always had the idea that the church would be more than just that and that community work would be at its core.“The seed for Beautiful Exchange was planted in 2013, and we moved to this building last June. The idea of the church was to start a foundation, to do community work, and to help create businesses,” he said.The acronym, R-City, stands for Communities Integrating Through Youth. The R is slang for “our” in Belfast The organisation uses young people as a tool to unite and uplift communities.Mr Jacobs was introduced to R-City when they visited Bonteheuwel a few years ago and wanted to meet with gang members, which Mr Jacobs facilitated.Founder of R-City Belfast, Alan Waite, said his youth centre was started with co-founder Thomas Turley, in 2013.“Both of of us worked in the communities that were, and still continue to be, divided by religion (Protestant and Catholic). Having grown up through the conflict ourselves, we have seen first-hand the devastation that has torn our country apart. “This drove us to design a project that would be positive change and a programme that would impact on the lives of youth living in and around the most notorious interfaces of Belfast. “As part of the project, we designed an international aspect where the groups of youth would travel to South Africa, and at that time we went to Blanco, in George. We later wanted to explore the Cape Flats areas, and wanted to see first-hand the communities we heard so much negativity about,” Mr Waite said.In 2015, R-City Belfast had an opportunity through funding from its local government, to design a programme dealing with choices and consequences. This they designed incorporating gang culture.“This led to us coming in contact with Pastor Norman and his team, through a friend of our project; Judith Kennedy. Our partnership with Pastor Norman grew strong at a very quick pace, and we noticed so many similarities between Bonteheuwel and Belfast,” he said.Mr Waite said both communities had negative stigmas attached to them due to their past or ongoing issues. Their aim is to get young people who have limited opportunities to get involved in positive programmes to impact their futures, to create positive role models, to create a safe space, and to raise the aspirations of the youth and wider community.“This programme is the beginning of something special, and I fully believe it will make a difference,” Mr Waite said.Mr Waite was among a 30-member team that was here for two weeks, leading up to the launch.Mr Jacobs said he was approached by the Belfast team, as he had been involved with gang peace talks before.“These youngsters grow up thinking children who live in another pocket of the community are their enemies, and I want to change that mindset. They don’t even know why they are enemies, but that is what happened generations before them and is just being passed on. Apart from local integration, we are also looking at cross-cultural integration, where we don’t see race or class. “We are busy forming bonds with the Langa community. Now our children realise that we are not that different after all,” Mr Jacobs said.He said they had “adopted” Cedar Primary’s Grade 6 classes, offering crime prevention programmes and introducing positive role models. He is also planning to have after-school programmes running at the church building, where children will be assisted with their homework, get something to eat, and have fun activities. Plans also include offering skills training, creating businesses and turning Bonteheuwel into a tourist destination.“Our vision is massive, and it won’t happen overnight. There is a Chinese saying which states that the best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago, and the second best time is now,” Mr Jacobs said.
Brady Cupido, 10, Brandon Louw, 12, Brad Louw, 10, Athena Cupido, 4, and Danté Cupido, 6, all from Manenberg. Manenberg families enjoy a day of sun, sand and sea at Strandfontein Pavilion tidal pool on Saturday January 4. Lohn Marcus, 6, from Morgens Village, her brother Elren, 11, and his friend Matthew Erasmus, 12, from Lentegeur. Families spent a day swimming and sun bathing on the beach. Lohn Marcus, 6, from Morgens Village, her brother Elren, 11, and his friend Matthew Erasmus, 12, from Lentegeur. 1 of 4
Author: Associated Press Do you see a typo or an error? Let us know. Published: May 22, 2017 9:07 PM EDT Updated: May 22, 2017 9:08 PM EDT SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) A botulism outbreak linked to contaminated nacho-cheese dip sold at a Northern California gas station has killed one man and left at least nine other people hospitalized, health officials said Monday.The San Francisco County coroner’s office identified the dead man as Martin Galindo-Larios Jr., 37.Matt Conens, a spokesman for the California Department of Public Health, declined to release further information on the death, the current condition of the other victims, or the status and extent of the investigation into the outbreak, discovered by early this month.Family members of Galindo-Larios did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment. An online fundraising page said he was married and the father of two small children.Tests confirmed the botulism toxin in nacho-cheese dip sold at a gas station in the Sacramento suburb of Walnut Grove, the state health agency said in a statement.The agency said last week the container and cheese dip were removed May 5, and that authorities believe the contamination posed no further risk to the public.Conens declined to disclose whether the gas station involved was still open, and whether authorities were examining if the contamination may have originated from the factory making the dip.Botulism, a comparatively rare kind of food poisoning, can lead to paralysis, breathing difficulty and sometimes death. Survivors often are forced to spend weeks or months on ventilators to help them breathe.A major outbreak of food-borne botulism stemmed from a church potluck in Ohio in 2015, when at least 29 people fell ill. Authorities blamed potato salad made from potatoes that had been canned improperly at home. SHARE Man dies in California botulism outbreak from nacho-cheese
Parents welcome baby on day of total solar eclipse, name her in its honor Published: August 21, 2017 9:35 PM EDT Author: WTTV WTTV A couple decided to name their baby Eclipse in honor of the rare astronomical event marking their little girl’s birth Monday.Parents Freedom and Paul Eubanks welcomed baby Eclipse to the world at 8:04 a.m. at Greenville Memorial Hospital in South Carolina. The healthy baby entered the world weighing 6 pounds, 3 ounces and measuring 19 inches in length.The decision to legally name her Eclipse was done at the last minute, according to the hospital. Paul and Freedom initially chose the name Violet for her, according to WSOC.“I kind of felt like it was meant to happen, to have her on this day,” her mother told the station. As for a nickname? “We’re probably going to call her Clipsey,” Freedom said.Eclipse has one sibling, an older sister, who’s 2 years old. Do you see a typo or an error? Let us know. SHARE
Bayat established that, as service out of the jurisdiction without the consent of the state in which service was to be effected was an interference with the sovereignty of that state, service by an alternative method under CPR 6.15 should be regarded as exceptional, to be permitted in special circumstances only. While the fact that proceedings served by an alternative method would come to the attention of a defendant more speedily was a relevant consideration when deciding whether to make an order under CPR 6.15, it was in general not a sufficient reason for an order for service by an alternative method. Bitumex (HK) Company Ltd v IRPC Public Company Ltd: Queen’s Bench Division, Commercial Court (Judge Mackie QC): 2 May 2012 Claim form – Service – Service out of the jurisdiction Abela further provided that it would usually be inappropriate to validate retrospectively a form of service which was not authorised by an order of an English judge when it was effected and was not good service by local law. It followed that a claimant who wished retrospective validation of a method of service in a foreign country should (save perhaps where there were adequate safeguards) show that the method of service which was to be retrospectively validated was good service by the local law (see ,  of the judgment). The instant was not a case where the English court was presuming to try a dispute itself, which, on the defendant’s case, had not been served to the standards required by local law for a trial in Thailand. The court was not being asked to try a dispute at all. It was being asked to assist the progress of an international arbitration in London, the method chosen by the parties for resolving their contractual disputes. Under section 1(a) of the 1996 act the parties were committed to fair resolution of disputes by an impartial tribunal without unnecessary delay or expense. The defendant had, in breach of section 16 of the 1996 act, failed to join in the appointment of an arbitrator and the court was asked to appoint one so that the arbitration might proceed. The defendant was fully aware of the existence of the arbitration and the specific service steps had been taken to reinforce the information already in its possession. The defendant was relying on formalities relating to the appointment of an arbitrator by the court which did not apply to the initiation of the arbitration process itself. The defendant was knowingly causing unnecessary delay and expense in the arbitration process. The defendant’s submissions that the fact that the instant case was an arbitration case did not take it out of the norm would be rejected. The considerations seemed to be facts relating to the proceedings which were crucial. They were facts which made the case exceptional in the sense explained in Bayat. They were considerations beyond the mere advantage of obtaining a speedier process than compliance with the local process would produce (see ,  of the judgment). Retrospective service as permitted by CPR 6.15 but subject to conditions would be ordered. Cecil v Bayat  All ER (D) 213 (Feb) applied; Abela v Baadarani  All ER (D) 171 (Dec) applied. Timothy Wormington (instructed by Nick Howe Solicitor) for the claimant; James Hatt (instructed by Watson Farley & Williams LLP) for the defendant. The parties entered into contracts containing London arbitration clauses. A dispute arose and the claimant gave notice of arbitration. The defendant declined to agree to the appointment of an arbitrator. The claimant issued the arbitration claim form with the court’s permission. A complete copy of the arbitration claim and all other documents were sent by registered mail to the defendant’s registered office in Thailand. An employee of the defendant acknowledged receipt of the documents on behalf of the defendant’s managing director. The receipt of the documents was confirmed by the defendant’s lawyer. The documents were also hand delivered to the registered office. They were received by the defendant’s senior executive vice-president and its legal department. The claimant sought the appointment of an arbitrator by the court. The defendant challenged the court’s jurisdiction on the ground that the arbitration claim form was not served on it in Thailand by a method permitted by the laws of Thailand under Civil Procedure Rule (CPR) 6.40(3)(c). The claimant sought a retrospective order under CPR 6.15 permitting service by the means that had been employed. The defendant submitted that the arbitration context did not make the case exceptional and did not take it outside the normal course. It fell to be determined whether the court should make a retrospective order for alternative service. The court considered Cecil v Bayat  All ER (D) 213 (Feb) (Bayat) and Abela v Baadarani  All ER (D) 171 (Dec) (Abela) and the Arbitration Act 1996 (the 1996 act). The application would be granted.
District Judge Spencer sits at Teesside Combined Court The Court of Appeal decision in Petrodel Resources Ltd and others v Prest and Others  EWCA Civ 1395,  All ER (D) 293 (Oct) (as Prest v Prest) marks a collision between chancery and family. Family lost. The decisions of the heroes of the Family Division of the High Court – Moylan, Bodey, Munby and Mostyn – who in classic mythology, though moral exemplars, are also mere demigods, were simply crushed underfoot. The judgments are summarised below. Mr Justice Moylan heard the financial remedy proceedings of Mr and Mrs Prest in the High Court. It was a very difficult matter. Mr Prest failed to provide any proper disclosure and his evidence ‘consisted significantly of obfuscation and dissembling’ (Lord Justice Thorpe, paragraph 12). Mr Prest also failed to comply with interim orders. The conclusion was, after drawing appropriate adverse inferences from Mr Prest’s conduct, that he was worth about £37.5m, and that Mrs Prest should be awarded £17.5m. But almost all of Mr Prest’s wealth was in a series of companies. He was the sole shareholder and director. Save for one property worth about £3m, all the properties subject to the judge’s final order were owned by those companies. The judge was aware of the significant problems of ordering large-scale share transfers, because of the mist surrounding the true position, and also the issues of enforcement against overseas property. Lord Justice Thorpe at paragraph 43 summarises the decision: ‘Accordingly, in the order giving effect to the judgment, the husband was ordered to transfer or cause to be transferred to the wife the London properties together with three properties in Nevis and the shares in a Nevis company. Following transfer the properties were to be sold and the net proceeds of sale applied in satisfaction of the lump sum.’ This ‘enforcement’ of the award caused the three appellant companies to intervene to appeal the decision to transfer the company-owned properties to Mrs Prest. Mr Justice Moylan decided that, because of Mr Prest’s unconstrained dealings with company income and assets during the marriage, Mr Prest was entitled to these properties ‘in either possession or reversion’ (section 24(1)(a) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973). Therefore this property was directly susceptible to an order for transfer/sale in the Family Division. The evidence showed that Mr Prest was the same as the companies. Any other directors were mere ciphers. There were no minority shareholders to be disadvantaged. Mr Prest drew monies from the company for considerable personal and family expenditure during the marriage without asking or reporting to anyone, and the accounting of such drawings was certainly vague. It was as if the assets, including the properties, were held under a bare trust, or the companies were his nominees. Accordingly, Salomon v A Salomon and Company Ltd  AC 22 did not prevent the court from making an order against a person ‘entitled’ in the section 24(1)(a) sense, as Mr Prest was found to be, requiring that person to exercise their control, so that property was transferred to the wife. And if not – was the truly obstructive husband to ‘get away’ with all that wealth, and the wife to get very little, because a rule of company law impeded the Family Division from making an order into more than a bit of scrap paper? The appellant companies said that the Family Division simply did not have this power. At paragraph 219, Mr Justice Moylan had rejected any finding of impropriety, that is, using the company structure to avoid or conceal liability (Ben Hashem v Al Shayif  EWHC 2380 (Fam);  1 FLR 115). Absent that finding, and other exceptions not relevant in this matter, the judge had no power to make the structuring/enforcement orders he did. In a forceful judgment, Lord Justice Rimer wholly agreed with the appellants. Lord Justice Rimer was in no doubt that the companies, and the other directors, danced to Mr Prest’s tune. However, despite this, the properties were assets of the companies. Mr Prest was not ‘entitled’ in any sense which fitted with the words of section 24(1)(a). To decide otherwise was contrary to the proper meaning of those words, and to long-established principles of company law. There was no impropriety, so the veil could not be pierced. Therefore the Family Division did not have the power to make the orders appealed. Fairness did not enter into it. It was contrary to law and that was the end of the matter. The majority view of the Court of Appeal is summarised at paragraph 97: ‘The judge’s different conclusion that such properties were, or were “effectively”, the husband’s property was based on reasoning that was internally inconsistent, contrary to principle and wrong.’ The triumph of the long-established and fundamental principle of Salomon, over any principles of fairness which the Family Division might wish to pursue, was crystallised by Lord Justice Rimer at paragraph 155: ‘A one-man company does not metamorphose into the one man simply because the person with a wish to abstract its assets is his wife.’ Lord Justice Rimer set out how and why Mr Justice Moylan and others have been so wrong for so long. Lord Justice Thorpe, while disagreeing, described the judgment as ‘powerful’ and ‘cogent’. This mere mortal has to accept that the Family Division has strained the meaning of section 24(1)(a), and its powers over the separate entity, which in law a company plainly is, perhaps beyond breaking point, in the interests of fairness. Lord Justice Rimer dismisses longstanding authorities from the Family Division starting with dicta of Lord Denning and Lord Justice Cumming-Bruce’s reasoning in Nicholas v Nicholas  FLR 285 (Petrodel at paragraphs 129 and 130). Mrs Prest currently intends to pursue an appeal to the Supreme Court. Victorious titans should perhaps remember that in myth, they, in their turn, became old gods, and were then cast down by new, even more powerful gods. There was as little kindness shown to the titans by victorious Zeus as was shown to the heroes by the Court of Appeal.
Barclays’ general counsel Mark Harding is to retire after a decade in the post, the bank announced.Group finance director Chris Lucas is also stepping down, though both senior executives will remain until successors are found.Commenting on the departures, group chief executive Antony Jenkins described the bank as being ‘at an inflection point’ in its ‘journey towards becoming the “go-to” bank’. He also stressed the contribution Harding and Lucas had made to the Barclays’ strategic review, the outcome of which will soon be made public.The review, Harding added, ‘provides an obvious transition point, and one which I have decided to take’.Barclays said the time needed to find replacements will be ‘considerable’. The next general counsel will face a sizeable in-tray of unresolved legal risks for the group. While the bank agreed to pay a £290m fine to settle the UK-US regulatory probe into Libor-fixing, the settlement has no bearings on worldwide civil claims arising from Libor-fixing.The bank has set aside £450m to settle claims related to mis-selling of derivatives products to businesses. Last week the Financial Services Authority reported that a review of 173 such sales by Barclays and three other banks to SMEs showed regulatory breaches in 90% of such sales.In other news, it was reported that the FSA and the Serious Fraud Office were investigating whether Barclays provided a loan to Qatar to fund its cash call in 2008, during its successful attempt to avoid a state bailout at the height of the financial crisis.Harding is likely to be still in post when Barclays announces the results of its biennial review of law firm panels, due in June. Barclays’ annual legal spend, on some 1,000 in-house lawyers and a panel of external law firms, is estimated at £100m.
Offering pay-as-you-go legal advice could enable solicitors to help clients denied legal aid after 1 April and may help firms generate more work, the Law Society president suggested today. Lucy Scott-Moncrieff told the Society’s legal aid conference: ‘The reality is that for many clients who are losing legal aid, buying a full casework service is unaffordable.’ Rather, firms should explore opportunities for ‘unbundling’ work – offering a pay-as-you-go service to clients who get advice on parts of a case rather than instructing a solicitor on a traditional retainer. ‘This means agreeing with the client which parts of the work they will undertake themselves, while you take on only the parts that add the most value for the client,’ she said. Scott-Moncrieff said that the route opens up ‘a number of regulatory and insurance challenges’, but she said ‘they are not insurmountable’ and guidance had been sought from the Solicitors Regulation Authority. In advance of 1 April, she said Chancery Lane will publish a practice note on unbundling, focusing particularly on family cases, providing model client care letters. Scott-Moncrieff accepted that this model would not assist the poorest clients, but said it would help those who would have made contributions towards their legal aid. In addition, she said, unbundling may generate work from clients who would not have been eligible for legal aid and who would have been put off going to law altogether. Solicitor and chief executive of legal software provider Epoq Richard Cohen told delegates that ‘unbundling’ would be necessary for firms to compete with new big brands entering the market. ‘The legal profession is the last bastion against self-service, but it will be forced to accept it, due to cost and competition,’ he said. Cohen said the process offered benefits for firms, expanding their market and generating more work, and for clients – making legal advice more affordable, less intimidating and giving them greater control. He added: ‘There is nothing in the Code of Conduct that would limit engagement, but you have to be clear with the client what you will do and what they will do.’ Join our LinkedIn Legal Aid sub-group
The outsourcing giant contracted to provide court interpreting services has been ordered to pay costs to a local authority over ‘serial failures’ in a family case.Sir James Munby, president of the Family Division, ordered Capita Translation and Interpreting to pay Kent County Council (pictured) the sum of £13,338.15 within seven days in respect of costs of hearings on 7 May and 14 November 2014.Munby was forced to adjourn a final adoption hearing on 7 May after no one attended to translate for Slovak-speaking parents.In an approved judgment published yesterday, Munby said two interpreters had been booked on 14 April, but at 2pm on 6 May the court was informed by Capita TI that no interpreters were available for the hearing.‘This was done by an automatically generated email which included the words “we apologise for any inconvenience caused” – a banal and formulaic statement hardly reflecting the fact that a failure to provide interpreters, particular in a case such as this, causes much more than “inconvenience” to all concerned, not least to the anxious parents,’ he said.Munby said there had been ‘serial failures by Capita in this case against a background of wider systemic problems’.‘In this case, the failures… were… not minor but extensive, and, at two different stages of the litigation, they had a profound effect on the conduct of proceedings.’However, Munby emphasised that he was not saying Capita should automatically be blamed each time an interpreter fails to turn up.‘Nor am I to be understood as suggesting that Capita will be liable for each and every failure to provide a Slovak interpreter, lamentable though its failures to provide such interpreters were in this particular case and, seemingly, more generally. Everything will depend upon the precise circumstances of the particular case.’Munby refused permission for Capita TI to appeal.A spokesperson for Capita TI said: ‘The service provided by this contract continues to improve, is robust and provides value for money. The rate of complaints remains very low, at 1.7% for July to September 2014 (the latest published figures) out of 38,100 jobs fulfilled.‘It wouldn’t be appropriate for us to comment on this particular case due to ongoing legal processes.’
Professional Footballers’ Association chief executive Gordon Taylor told a roomful of lawyers at today’s Global Law Summit: ‘I recognise rather too many of your faces because there is so much – perhaps too much – litigation in the modern game.’Taylor (pictured) was there to discuss the impact of the Financial Fair Play (FFP) rules, which were phased in over several years and began to come into force during the 2013-14 season. The rules, introduced by the Union of European Football Associations (UEFA), are intended to improve the financial health of European football by obliging clubs to live within their means.‘During the 1980s,’ said Taylor, ‘the game was on the verge of dying following a series of stadia disasters, such as those at Bradford, Hillsborough and Heysel. Ensuring that money is spent on safety compliance in stadia makes FFP sound like Aunt Mary’s apple pie – how can anyone argue with it? The FFP also makes sure that players’ salaries and transfer fees are paid, another benefit to the game.’At the event, presented by the Law Society, Mills & Reeve head of sport Mark Hovell applauded the introduction of the FFP rules. ‘Clubs were buying players without paying for them, and only paying what was due after they were taken to arbitration. They weren’t paying tax, creditors or salaries.‘Of Spain’s top 40 clubs, only nine have not gone into administration. And even today, players’ salaries at Italy’s Parma football club have not been paid since last summer.’FFP has encouraged clubs to reorganise how they structure their business, said Hovell. They now face penalties if they do not, ‘give or take 5m euros’, live within their means. Some clubs, notably Manchester City, he said, have improved their training facilities so as to develop the next top striker, rather than go out and buy one.They have also improved their stadia to attract more ticket-buying spectators and devised ways to monetarise their overseas supporters.Maurice Watkins, a lawyer at north-west England firm Brabners and, among other roles, chair of Barnsley Football Club, addressed the controversial issue of alleged corruption at the Federation Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) when it selected Russia and Qatar to host forthcoming world cups.He said that so far six members of the FIFA executive committee have been fined and suspended, but that an independent report into the allegations has not been made public.He added: ‘A November 2014 report cleared both Russia and Qatar, although Russia claimed that it was unable to disclose all the necessary papers because the computers it used were leased and have now gone on to new owners, including schools.’FIFA remains the ultimate arbitrator for football and wants to keep disputes within the sport. ‘This might be the most practical solution,’ Watkins ended. ‘After all, if you have an Argentinian playing for a Japanese team who is then sold to Australia, where does the jurisdiction lie when a dispute arises? Maybe it really is best to keep disputes in-house.’