<div dir="ltr">2013/5/23 Ben Liddicott <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ben@liddicott.com" target="_blank">ben@liddicott.com</a>></span><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><div class="im">
<br></div>
Well, that's a good summary of the argument, but not actually a good
reason, and it's not actually what happens. <br>
<br>
It's not what happens because the vast majority of such requests are
for things which could perfectly well have waited to the next
working day and been dealt with in bulk.<br>
<br>
It's not a good reason firstly because there is no technical reason
why a court order has to be slow. IANAL, but AFAIK a court order or
warrant can be given by telephone, fax or email if need be - I don't
believe there is any legal requirement for the judge to be in the
same room as the petitioner - and if there is, why not just change
that rule for emergencies?<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div style>You can get an order over the telephone. There's a 24/7 "duty judge" system that means you can always get a judge (possibly out of bed) for an urgent order. Clearly you have to have a pretty good reason to do that but the system is there.</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>If this was going to happen a lot then I am sure the court service could (if it was told to) set up a system that made this work.</div></div><div><br></div>-- <br>Francis Davey<br><br>
</div></div>