give it a rest, please, page-11

Dear tototy,

I am pretending to know the law? Really? I guess the Supreme Court of Victoria must have it wrong then. The Legal Services Commissioner must also be hoodwinked. What the heck, you may as well add my clients.

You would do better to read what I wrote rather than try and engage in a battle you can't win. Have a read of the relevant paragraph below (the basis of which you use to attack me) and kindly identify where I claim that I don't understand why the government is in involved in the case.

Further, please explain why you use the word defendant to describe the government. My education and training would see them identified as Respondent but you may know better than me. Could you also refer me to any court document that identifies the parties of the two review cases for everyone's benefit.

In order to refresh your memory and assist you I wrote, "One of the news reports stated that the company and the government were opposing the granting of an interim injunction, but I am uncertain as to whether the government is a party to the review cases. It is only natural that the government would wish to be a party as it was the ultimate decision maker who gave approval of the TOL."

Why would you suggest I should be put down a little? It is you who should be, not me. The difficulty for you it seems is that you can't help yourself.

I look forward to your reply and the plenty more you had to write.