Sacha Lord loses legal battle against government to reopen indoor hospitality before 17th May
The judgement came just hours before a SAGE report emerged that stated that "eating out in any food outlet or restaurant was not associated with increased odds" of becoming infected with coronavirus (COVID-19).
The High Court has ruled in favour of the government in a legal challenge over its decision to delay the reopening of indoor hospitality until 17th May.
The judgement comes after Greater Manchester’s Night Time Economy Adviser, Sacha Lord – who is also the co-founder of Parklife Festival and Warehouse Project – and Punch Taverns founder Hugh Osmond, notably joined forces last month to take the government to court over hospitality restrictions as they argued that bars, restaurants and cafes should be allowed to provide indoor service on the same date as non-essential retail reopens.
It’s estimated that the delay in reopening indoor hospitality could end up costing the sector £7 billion over the five weeks.
The case to permit the reopening of indoor hospitality was expedited at the start of last month, and a response was initially supposed to be provided on the week commencing Monday 19th April – but was delayed.
ADVERTISEMENT
Following the delays, Mr Lord – who has continuously claimed over the last couple of months that the government has been unable to provide evidence for their reasoning behind the roadmap, and has insisted he will share the documents once received – took to social media last week to confirm that the case was with a High Court Judge and he was “expecting news imminently”.
He stressed that “every day counts” and that it’s about “data NOT dates”.
ADVERTISEMENT
Legal update:
We were informed a ruling would be made the week commencing the 19th.
We have now been informed, a High Court Judge was not available last week and it is now, at last, sat with him.
And after nearly a week of awaiting response, the High Court ruled in favour of the government in the case R (On the Application of Sacha Lord and Hugh Osmond) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, saying that COVID-19 justifies a cautious approach.
The judgement came just hours before a SAGE report emerged that stated that “eating out in any food outlet or restaurant was not associated with increased odds” of becoming infected with coronavirus (COVID-19), and while it’s said that the report was not disclosed by the defence during the legal proceedings, in the overview, the Honourable Mr Justice Julian Knowles dismissed the call for Judicial Review to bring forward indoor reopenings as “academic”.
“This case is not ‘academic’ for an industry that is losing £200m every day it remains closed,” Hugh Osmand commented.
ADVERTISEMENT
“For the over three million people who work in our industry, or for the tens of thousands of businesses, suppliers, landlords and contractors forced into bankruptcy by government measures, our legal action gave them a fighting chance,
“Yet once again in 2021, the strong arm of the state has come crushing down on hope and aspiration.
“The judge said that Covid ‘justifies a precautionary or cautious approach on the part of the government’, but when a crucial SAGE report is ignored, this goes far beyond caution, and questions need to be asked about when this advice was sought and why this important evidence was not disclosed.
“I am deeply concerned that the judge’s main reason for refusing judicial review was because our claim ‘was not brought promptly’, even though we issued our claim days after the roadmap became law on 25th March, with the court taking a month to provide its ruling.
“This judgment drives a coach and horses through our normal constitutional processes.
ADVERTISEMENT
“Are we really being told that we should have issued legal proceedings on the basis of a Prime Minister’s press conference and a yet to be published set of laws?
“Our democracy should be better than this”.
In a normal legal case, non-disclosure of evidence like the Sage report would wreck the Government's case. But, after considering it over the weekend, our legal team advise it is not grounds to challenge the Judicial Review decision. We will be reviewing other legal options.
The Gov’t FAILED to disclose a SAGE report, confirming that during the whole pandemic, only 226 cases were associated to Hospitality. pic.twitter.com/bQlRquPCW5
Commenting on the decision, Sacha Lord said in a statement: “We are disappointed with the outcome.
“While this fight has always been an uphill battle, made harder by the government’s delaying tactics and refusal to mediate, we are pleased that the case has shone a light on the hospitality sector and the unfair and unequal guidance within the recovery roadmap [as] through our legal challenges, we have achieved significant outcomes for the sector, abolishing the substantial meal requirement with our previous court action and lobbying hard to remove with the 10pm curfew.
“Both of these results have had a hugely positive impact on operators nationwide who have been unfairly treated throughout this crisis and undoubtedly saved many jobs throughout the industry.
ADVERTISEMENT
“Through our legal action, we have sent a clear, strong message direct to the heart of government [and] we will continue to advocate for those who have been unfairly impacted throughout this crisis, and despite the outcome, we will continue to hold the government to account and demand evidence-based decisions, rather than those drafted without detailed analysis or based on bias or whim”.
Flickr
He continued: “The hospitality sector has gone above and beyond to implement measures which provide safe, secure environments – measures which were, let’s not forget, advised as safe by the government themselves and which the court already deemed to be effective based on the evidence we provided in support of our previous judicial review.
“There are thousands of bars, pubs and restaurants across the country which are still closed and whose owners and employees are struggling financially due to these unfair restrictions.
“For the 40% minority who do have outdoor space, this weekend’s weather has only exacerbated the ongoing struggles the industry has continually faced, and I’ve heard of countless pubs that have been forced to close early or who have had zero customers due to the bad weather.
“Not only does this severely impact on business and sector recovery, but on the staff whose wages, and ability to pay rent, food and bills, are at the mercy of something as unpredictable as the weather”.
Featured Image – Weird & Wonderful
News
Yorkshire Tea is Manchester’s ‘favourite’ brand of teabags, according to new data
Danny Jones
The Great British debate of which teabag is best is one that will rage on for millennia, that’s just the way it is, but according to new data, it sounds like we might at least have an answer to which brand makes for Manchester’s favourite brew.
It won’t be a surprise to many of you and we can certainly confirm it on our end but the one and only Yorkshire Tea looks to have taken the cuppa crown when it comes not only to Manchester’s preferred teabag but seemingly the best-loved in Britain as a whole.
This is according to numbers pulled by local firm, TonerGiant. The Atherton-based ink and toner suppliers decided a poll around the office wasn’t enough and instead chose to turn their knowledge of the market and consumer trends into a bit of online research.
At the end of the day, tea has got to be the most important of all office supplies, surely?
According to the stats, Yorkshire Tea is Manchester’s favourite brand of tea bags. (Credit: Yorkshire Tea)
Using data from trusted online source Statista, which nailed down the top 25 teabag brands in the UK, each make was then ranked in relation to its average monthly searches via Google Keyword Planner to reveal that Yorkshire Tea was clearly the top dog.
With roughly 390 searches per month in Manchester alone, compared to PG Tips as the next best (260), it seems us Mancs have to concede at least one thing to our fellow Northern county: Yorkshire makes a bloody good brew.
The Roses rivalry raged for centuries but if there’s one thing that brings us together, it’s a good cuppa.
In terms of other tea brands that came in high on the leaderboard, Pukka Tea (170), Twinings (140)and Teapigs (90) made up the rest of the top five most-searched tea brands in Greater Manchester. It’s also interesting to see how those figures looked when extrapolated nationwide. Here’s the full ranking:
Rank
Tea
Average UK monthly searches
1
Yorkshire Tea
27,100
2
PG Tips
18,100
3
Pukka Tea
14,800
4
Twinings
12,100
5
Teapigs
8,100
6
Whittards Tea
6,600
7
Tetley
4,400
8
Clipper Tea
4,400
9
Lipton Tea
3,600
10
Barrys Tea
3,600
11
Thompsons Tea
1,300
12
Typhoo
1,300
13
Taylors Tea
1,300
14
M&S Tea
1,300
15
Tesco Tea
1,000
16
Tick Tock Tea
880
17
Sainsbury’s Tea
720
18
Lyons Tea
720
19
Asda Tea
590
20
Aldi Tea
590
21
Waitrose Tea
590
22
Lidl Tea
480
23
Morrisons Tea
320
24
Bewleys Tea
90
25
Cafedirect Tea
40
Few of these on here we’ve never heard of. Taste test, anyone?
While Yorkshire Tea was found to be Manchester’s and the nation’s favourite, Belfast was the only UK city where Yorkshire Tea didn’t take the top spot. Instead, it was Irish-owned Barry’s Tea that came out as their favourite – we definitely need to hold a ‘brew-off’ between the two. The Hoot, you up for it?
As for supermarket’s own-brand offerings, out of the eight options on the list, Marks and Spencer’s teabags were found to be the most popular, closely followed by Tesco and then Sainsbury’s.
Commenting on the findings, TonerGiant’s Stuart Deavall said: “With so many office workers opting for tea to get through the day, it’s no surprise that the UK has a day dedicated to the drink.
“In light of National Tea Day on Sunday, 21 April, our new data shows that Yorkshire Tea is the nation’s favourite, with over 27,000 Brits searching every month… We can expect many Brits to be celebrating in style this Sunday, no doubt with a mug of Yorkshire tea in hand”. Speaking of, anyone fancy a brew?…
Featured Images — Yorkshire Tea/Rumman Amin (via Unsplash)
News
Manchester palaeontologist unearths bones of what may be the largest known marine reptile
Emily Sergeant
A Manchester-based palaeontologist has unearthed the bones of what may be the largest known marine reptile.
This new identification is a crucial part of a fascinating eight-year long discovery journey.
It all started when a seasoned fossil collector named Paul de la Salle found a giant jawbone on Lilstock Beach, near Bridgewater in Somerset, back in May 2016, and then father and daughter, Justin and Ruby Reynolds from Devon, found the first pieces of a second jawbone and another giant bone while searching for fossils on the beach at Blue Anchor, also in Somerset, in May 2020.
And now, a palaeontologist at the University of Manchester (UoM) Dr Dean Lomax, has identified the fossilised remains of the second gigantic jawbone that measures more than two metres long.
Experts have identified these bones as belonging to the jaws of a new species of enormous ichthyosaur – which is a type of prehistoric marine reptile – and astonishing estimations suggest the oceanic titan would have been more than 25-metres long.
Dr Lomax has been working together with Justin and Ruby Reynolds, along with Paul de la Salle and several family members, since the father-daughter duo first contacted them about their groundbreaking discovery in 2020.
A Manchester palaeontologist has unearthed bones of what may be the largest known marine reptile / Credit: UoM
“I was amazed by Justin and Ruby’s find,” Dr Lomax commented.
“In 2018, my team and Paul de la Salle studied and described Paul’s giant jawbone, and we had hoped that one day another would come to light.”
He explained that Justin and Ruby’s new specimen was “more complete and better preserved” than the first find, and that he “became very excited” at the chance to learn more following their discovery.
As mentioned, the Manchester-based research team, led by Dr Lomax, revealed that the jaw bones belong to a new species of giant ichthyosaur that would’ve been about the size of a blue whale, and they have called the new genus and species Ichthyotitan severnensis – which means ‘giant fish lizard of the Severn’.
The bones – which represent the very last of their kind – are around 202 million years old, and date back to the end of the Triassic Period in a time known as the Rhaetian.
During this time, the gigantic ichthyosaurs swam the seas while the dinosaurs walked on land.
The University of Manchester, where Dr Dean Lomax works as a palaeontologist / Credit: UoM
Ichthyotitan is not the world’s first giant ichthyosaur, but the discoveries by Paul, and Justin and Ruby, are said to be “unique among those known to science”, as they appear roughly 13 million years after their latest geologic relatives – including Shonisaurus sikanniensis from British Columbia in Canada, and Himalayasaurus tibetensis from Tibet in China.
Speaking on the confirmation of the bones’ identification this week, Dr Lomax said: “This research has been ongoing for almost eight years.
“It is quite remarkable to think that gigantic, blue whale-sized ichthyosaurs were swimming in the oceans around what was the UK during the Triassic Period.
The Manc -
4th May 2021 
