An Explainer About Injunctions Done Wrong - Part I - Saving Money Where Money Cannot be Saved
In 2024 Garrett lodged a lawsuit against me and against my wife. As we shall explain in the future (when the time is more suitable), he made a seriously tactless error because the court fees he paid (percentage of the claim's expected "worth") gave away that he was not serious and was all along trying to settle (he and his American litigation buddy would, indeed, attempt to settle nearly 10 times! Even as recently as last month!) and that the chosen barrister was very junior - a polite term for inexperienced - "with an eye on cost" (trying to cheapen the whole procedure), as the legal occupation might nonchalantly put it. This strategy was a giveaway as he could not afford the case (by the following summer he would have to ask people/companies for financial help with the case on at least three occasions).
In this short series we'll show how cost-saving moves ended up costing dearly and are still an agonising factor for Garrett. Is he willing to spend up to 2 million pounds litigating? And if so, who would fund this litigation aside from his and his friend's Sugar Daddies that promote slop plagiarism?
Don't choose barristers/counsels based on price. Not in the situation where 1) they're unsuitable for the task; 2) the other side isn't gullible.
Of course Garrett not being able to afford his own case is a key factor here; had he lost his claim, chasing him for costs would be close to impossible due to poverty (lawyers' fee driving him into debt) and being based in some faraway forest in another continent. One other very important aspect, as pointed out 2+ years, suing him for defamation would be pointless as enforcing a defamation verdict from the UK would not be possible in the US. █