1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174 
Twisted trailer chassis fine
Page 23
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• In our report under this heading in CM dated 8-14 June, we wrongly described Stevecastle Limited of Otmdle near Peterborough as a "trailer builder". They are not trailer builders. The trailer in this case was built by AHP Trailers of Wolverhampton.
In the final paragraph of the report, Counsel for Stevecastle was quoted as saying that the fine and costs of this case could mean the end of the company. The quote is inserted at the end of the report after it was stated that a fine of £1,000 plus costs had been imposed. The mistaken impression was given that Counsel was saying that that fine and costs would mean an end of the company.
We have been asked to point out that Counsel made his comments before the fine was imposed and that they have to be seen in the context that the Court had power to impose an unlimited fine. Counsel was explaining that if the Court imposed a heavy fine, then this would have severe implications for the future of the company. In fact, the fine was limited to £1,000 and accordingly that fine and the costs involved will most certainly not mean the end of Stevecastle Limited.
__L._ 6 .4