De Cotta McKenna & Santafé 4th Anniversary

De Cotta McKenna & Santafé Appeal One Case in Two Courts in Two Countries at One Time

5 August 2009

Case No. HS03D00476 in the County Court of Hastings, England rumbles on. So does the same case in Malaga, Spain. De Cotta McKenna & Santafé are the well known  law firm in Spain who are bringing the case to Court or should that be bringing these cases to Courts?

The company are well aware that they have acted illegally to enforce a mis-translated English Court Order since August 5th 2005 on behalf of their client Valerie Celia Russell. They are also aware they were denied that miscarriage of justice on 21st January and again at appeal in March of this year in Torrox Court in Spain.

Appeal number 2 is lodged with the High Court in Malaga, Spain while appeal number 3 is due for a hearing on 16th September in Hastings, England. Which Court will have the authority over the other? Which decision will Jon Sutton, the partner of De Cotta McKenna & Santafé conducting the case in England decide to act upon?

Indeed, is this  legal?

Were this not such a serious matter one could almost laugh at the antics which are reminiscent of spoilt children running between their parents until they get what they want.

Meanwhile, the English Court Order could have been honoured on a number of occasions and still can be as I write but for the careless and incorrect wording of the original Court Order laid down by District Judge Pollard (then Deputy). Edward Kirwan, the respondent, has buyers for the property which will allow him to honour the Court Order yet both De Cotta McKenna & Santafé and the wording of the Hastings Court Order are denying him that privilege.

On this 4th anniversary of Jon Sutton’s mystic reading of the translated Court Order, (see this post) let me leave you with this thought…

De Cotta McKenna & Santafé – Appealing or Appalling?

Subscribe in a reader

Injustice in Europe with Blogcatalog

Please leave comments below.

Injustice in Europe – A Review

Following many comments both public and private I thought it necessary to publish a review.

Summary:

2001: 6 months after making the move to Spain wife deserts husband. Husband sends €90,000 (all joint savings) to wife in order for her to start new life in England. Wife sues for divorce. No papers were ever received by husband.

2004: Aug. 11th. Divorce settlement case in Hastings County Court, England. Wife legally represented, husband represented himself (no legal representation was available due to his residency in Spain). Court awards wife £66,590 payable within 3 months. Interest rate set at 8% while in Spain it was 3%.

2004/5 Edward tries to appeal decision. Appeal denied. Edward engages Estate Agents.

2005: Aug. 6th.   Edward, trying to honour debt, finds first buyer for property. Edward receives mail from DeCotta Law  stating they represent Valerie Celia Russell who will not accept any sale “on the basis that the proceeds will cover the entire judgment debt”   There was a shortfall of some £8,500.  Additionally, …”we have had the court order legalised and translated into Spanish” quote from  Jon Sutton, DeCotta McKenna and  Santafé.

2005: Aug.11th. English Court Order translated by official Sworn Translator. (incorrectly) Edward suffers work related accident and becomes disabled.

2008: May. Spanish Court Order discovered on noticeboard of Torrox Court by friend of Edward. Official notice dated February 2008. No other notice received by Edward.

2008: Sept/Nov: New buyer found. New buyer told, in writing by DeCotta McKenna and Santafé, that Edward’s 50% of the property was set to be auctioned on 16th Dec. at Torrox Court. The  Official Translation of the original English Court Order was found to be incorrect. Torrox Court deny issuing order for 16th Dec auction and supply no details as to how a public auction is to be carried out and state that the auction is set for 21st January 2009.

Slipping through the legal net, a 53 year old Englishman, resident in Spain, is to lose his house and home within a matter of days. He has fallen victim to cross-border legal processes and unfortunate circumstances which include an archaic and somewhat secretive, local legal system.

27 Days to Homelessness – The Incorrect Translation

It’s Official. The Official Sworn Translator states that his original translation of the English Court Order was incorrect.

I asked the Sworn Translator to comment upon the following translation.
 
The English Court Order states:
 
English version: ii) the respondents solicitors shall have conduct of the sale.
 
Your Spanish translation: ii) La representacia letrada del demandante administrara la venta.

*************************************************************************

For those of you who do not speak Spanish the word “demandante” means “plaintiff” in English NOT “respondent”. Therefore his sworn translation gave the completely opposite effect to the English Court Order and has been acted upon to stop me from selling my property and paying my debt.

This is the statement of B.R. True, Official Sworn Translator of the Spanish Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

“I have checked my records and you are indeed right.  Subparagraph iv) a) and Paragraph 3. made the whole order rather confusing, but I did mistranslate item ii), which should have read  “representación letrada del demandado”.  I sincerely regret this mistake, which is a sad exception in my 21 years of unblemished experience. “

Rather confusing Mr. True? I have some stronger words than that. How about disastrous blunder to start with. I am about to lose my home and everything I have worked for because of your regrettable mistake and “sad exception”.

Slipping through the legal net, a 53 year old Englishman, resident in Spain, is to lose his house and home within a matter of days. He has fallen victim to cross-border legal processes and unfortunate circumstances which include an archaic and somewhat secretive, local legal system.