Triad Group Plc: Authentication Authorisation In Records Access Includes Transcription Requests: Part E Of EX107 (13.2.20 Saini J) Must Be Completed Including Requirements Such As Judge Authorisation - Companies Court 6530-2005

EMBARGO'ED TRANSCRIPT 13 FEBRUARY 2020 (NO PUBLIC RECORDS, NO JUDGE'S AUTHORISATION, PRIVACY DESIGNATION) SENT TO UBIQUS WHEN EPIQ WERE OVERLOADED , HAS NOT BEEN SENT TO SAINI J FOR AUTHORISATION OF RELEASE, NOR PROVIDED TO MM INCLUDING ON BEHALF OF TRD

UBIQUS HAS BEEN PAID IN FULL BY MM INCLUDING AN EXTRA £100 THEY DEMANDED AFTER PRICING.

ANY THIRD PARTY WHO HAS PURCHASED COPIES FROM UBIQUS HAS OBTAINED EMBARGO'ED UNAUTHORISED RECORDS IN CONTEMPT OF COURT AND IS ON NOTICE THEY CANNOT BE USED OR REFERENCED ON ANY SUBSCRIPTION SERVICE OR OTHERWISE PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE.

TRIAD GROUP PLC CARRIES THE REPUTATION DAMAGE UNTIL SUCH TIME AS ALL UBIQUS MATERIALS ARE WITHDRAWN AND UBIQUS ISSUES A CERTIFICATE OF DESTRUCTION OF THE AUDIO FOR 12.2.19

From: "XXXXXXXXX" <XXXXXXXXXXX@Justice.gov.uk>

Subject: RE: MAKAR Re: URGENT FOR DESPATCH THIS MORNING-48 HOUR SERVICE PUBLIC COMPANY LISTED SHARES 13.2.20 Saini J Ct 13 RCJ *OFFICIAL*

Date: 18 February 2020 at 16:34:14 GMT

To: Mira Makar <mira.makar@btinternet.com>,

"Administrative Court Office, QB & ACO Transcripts Requests" <AdministrativeCourtOffice.QB&ACOTranscriptsRequests@hmcts.x.gsi.gov.uk>,

Legal <legal@ubiqus.com>

Dear all,

I confirm we will send to Ubiqus instead of Epiq.

Kind regards,

XXXXXXX

XXXXXXXX

Manager The Courts Recording and Transcription Unit

Room WB14 Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2A 2LL

Tel: 020 XXXXXXX Fax: 020 XXXXXXX Email: rcj.cratu@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

From: Mira Makar [mailto:mira.makar@btinternet.com]

Sent: 18 February 2020 16:22

To: RCJ CRATU <rcj.cratu@Justice.gov.uk>;

Administrative Court Office, QB & ACO Transcripts Requests <AdministrativeCourtOffice.QB&ACOTranscriptsRequests@hmcts.x.gsi.gov.uk>;

Legal <legal@ubiqus.com>

Cc: XXXXXXXX <XXXXXXXXXX@Justice.gov.uk>;

M MAKAR <mira.makar@btinternet.com>

Subject: MAKAR Re: URGENT FOR DESPATCH THIS MORNING-48 HOUR SERVICE PUBLIC COMPANY LISTED SHARES 13.2.20 Saini J Ct 13 RCJ *OFFICIAL*

Dear XXXXXX

CHANGE OF SUPPLIER- UBIQUS NOT EPIQ

Many thanks for your efficiency. The authorised EX107 is attached for UBIQUS, as there is now a change of supplier.

I understand that no new EX107 is required, but this email will suffice.

I have spoken to Becky at UBIQUS, where I am also a customer, and she will be on the look out for it.

This has arisen because EPIQ management have asked that someone else should do it. Epiq appear to have a severe back log in their new West country centre.

PLEASE THEREFORE TAKE THIS EMAIL AS AUTHORISATION THAT THE AUDIO SHOULD BE POSTED TO UBIQUS.

I HAVE PRE WARNED BECKY THAT I AM SENDING THEM THE OLD EX107 (ALREADY AUTHORISED) AND THIS IS ATTACHED.

I hope this goes in to-day's post.

Thank you and RCJ CRATU

Mira

Mira Makar MA FCA (Miss)

00 44 (0)7768 610071

Christos Anesti!.

www.servinglondon.com

Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Romans 13

On Monday, 17 February 2020, 14:25:42 GMT,

Administrative Court Office, QB & ACO Transcripts Requests <administrativecourtoffice.qb&acotranscriptsrequests@hmcts.x.gsi.gov.uk> wrote:

Dear Team,

Please see attached Transcript request.

Kind Regards

XXXXXXX

From: Mira Makar [mailto:mira.makar@btinternet.com]

Sent: 17 February 2020 11:48

To: Administrative Court Office, QB & ACO Transcripts Requests <AdministrativeCourtOffice.QB&ACOTranscriptsRequests@hmcts.x.gsi.gov.uk>;

Civil <civil@epiqglobal.co.uk>;

XXXXXXX <XXXXXXX@epiqglobal.co.uk>;

XXXXX<XXXXXX@epiqglobal.co.uk>

Cc: XXXXXX, XXXXXXXXX<XXXXXXXXX@Justice.gov.uk>;

M MAKAR <mira.makar@btinternet.com>

Subject: URGENT FOR DESPATCH THIS MORNING-48 HOUR SERVICE PUBLIC COMPANY LISTED SHARES 13.2.20 Saini J Ct 13 RCJ

Dear RCJ CRATU

Please authorise URGENTLY (48 hour service requested)

the digital in regard my listed public company TRIAD GROUP PLC

This was listed as

TRIAD GROUP PLC v MAKAR

before SAINI J

Court 13

RCJ

10.30 am - 40 minutes

THURSDAY 13 FEBRUARY 2020

Please note the computer records are wrong and until we get the transcript, we won't know what it was about.

I agreed with the associates that I would do this to-day and they would take up with the judges clerk why she thought it appropriate to get her judge to sit.

TRIAD GROUP PLC is not represented. I am, once we know what this is, The listing title TRIAD GROUP PLC v MAKAR appeared for the first time on the board 12.2.20

I believe it refers to the late XXXXX MAKAR because the journalists present told me that they were talking about her and her death.

If that is the case it might be it gets allocated to HQ06XO1803 Herbert Smith LLP v Mira Makar ( D&CC £21m in my favour) because it is the identical issues.

XXXXXXX, manager went off to find the files, but has not reverted.

Very many thanks

Mira Makar

Mira Makar MA FCA (Miss)

00 44 (0)7768 610071

Christos Anesti!.

www.servinglondon.com

Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Romans 13

__________________________________________________________________

This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service. For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com

______________________________________________________________________

The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and are intended for the use of the correct recipient(s) only. If you have received this email in error, please contact the author immediately. It is an offence to disclose or distribute the contents of this email and/or any attachments without consent of the author.

If your email has not been acknowledged or answered within 5 working days, or if you have difficulty reading this email or any attachment included, please contact the author on the number quoted above. The author is not authorised to bind the Department contractually, or to make representations or other statements which may bind the Department in any way via electronic means.

This e-mail and any attachments is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail. Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail. This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. Monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

Version 1 28 Nov 2020, 17:42 Custodian of Information

Page URL:

https://sites.google.com/site/publishedinthepublicdomain/Triad-Group-Plc-Authentication-Authorisation-Part-E-Of-EX107-Transcriptions-13220-SainiJ--Must-Be-Completed-With-Judge-Authorisation-Companies-Court-6530-2005

Pitch to get money belonging to the Court (deposit in Court Funds Office)

having discovered that there is some £124k in suspense account seemingly (on the account given) embezzled without audit trail from HM Gov Paymaster General and not returned

13 February 2020

AM Fulton; A Lander; Two men one of whom appeared in Cote 27.2.20

Spokesman: Jacob Dean

Evidence given: NEB present (he was not) and was party to the request.

Unexplained: how £50k max requested by NEB and AMF got inflated

Unexplained: what this has to do with Triad Group Plc (or anyone else)

Unexplained: whether this money has been returned

Unexplained: why BAILII and other publishers have not to date been asked to take down their publications of embargo'ed data which was not delivered on Friday 14 February 2020, witness Gemma Bedford Freeths LLP, Emily Buchanan, MM for Triad Group Plc, members creditors, those interested and potentially prejudiced.

JACOB DEAN: My Lord, there is one matter of detailed mechanics which I would like to raise with you in relation to getting the money from the Court Office.

PUSHPINDER SAINI: Yes.

JACOB DEAN: You will have seen and I did the exercise in the skeleton argument but I haven’t done it orally, to satisfy the court that the Court Funds Office has been served.

PUSHPINDER SAINI: Yes. I am satisfied about that.

JACOB DEAN: You’ve seen that?

PUSHPINDER SAINI: Yes.

JACOB DEAN: The Court Funds Office wrote to Freeths, I don’t think this letter was in the bundle, but I do have a copy and I think it’s right to draw it to your attention.

Discussion sotto voce.

JACOB DEAN: May I just pass this up?

PUSHPINDER SAINI: Certainly. Thank you.

JACOB DEAN: The letter is dated 29 January, although it was not received by my instructing solicitors until 6 February, from the Court Funds Office with the appropriate reference. ‘A blocking remains on this account. Funds will only be released on an authorised authenticated payment schedule from the following court.’ And then it says, ‘Companies Court, Rolls Building’. The Form 200, the CFO form requires and authenticated payment schedule referring to an order allowing payment out,-

PUSHPINDER SAINI: Yes.

JACOB DEAN: -signed by a Master, District Judge or proper officer. My instructing solicitors have spoken to the Court Funds Office, it’s not been quite possible to get to the bottom of this. We have a concern that an order from the Queen’s Bench Division would be sent back because it’s not from the Commercial Court.

PUSHPINDER SAINI: Companies Court.

JACOB DEAN: Companies Court, I’m sorry.

PUSHPINDER SAINI: Yes.

JACOB DEAN: But that, in my submission, would be wrong because the Rules do not require an order by the court in which the, as a result of which, the money was paid in. The Rules simply say ‘Well, from a court’. So, My Lord, I would hope that an order from…

[Crosstalk]

PUSHPINDER SAINI: Well, why do we not try that first? So, if…let us…in the order that I will ask you to draw up once you have got a judgment, I can make an order under the relevant provisions of the CPR and then, if the Court Funds Office is not happy with that then we can… I would be surprised if they were not happy with it, but one never can tell and if they need it then to be converted in to an order of a Registrar or a Master of the Companies Court, I would be surprised if that is a problem.

JACOB DEAN: I’m obliged, My Lord, I thought it was appropriate-

PUSHPINDER SAINI: Yes.

JACOB DEAN: -to raise it,-

PUSHPINDER SAINI: Okay.

JACOB DEAN: -but thank you…

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse