| The Comments |
|
Oh why can't JA just p**s off, every time i try and read something on any thread I have to sift through your c**p and there is plenty of it.
For god's sake JA you have your money, get a life and do something else with you spare time, please leave us in peace, I bet you won't and I;m sure I will get some crap from you about this posting.
0
Like
Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know
|
How can this be JA's crap ?
It is an informative artical in the Olive Press.
I for one am grateful for any information and wonder how you feel you have the authority to tell anyone to vacate a public forum.
Ken.
0
Like
Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know
|
Ken,
Apologies to you, I have no authority whatseover to tell anyone to leave a forum, just really fed up of searching through JA's postings and I'm sure I am not alone but at least I have been brave enough to say something!
0
Like
Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know
|
|
|
|
This article is from last year Tony !!!! Post the December 2010 article which shows the supreme court upholding the shepherds objections regards the water etc the article that says there will be no change of use on this land !!!!!!!!! EVER !!!!!!!
0
Like
Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know
|
Tony,
Could you for me explain this article that JA posted as it was dated 29th Dec 2010, JA please keep quiet and let Tony have his say!
A MURCIA shepherd has won a decisive battle to protect his land against developers.
Spain’s Supreme Court upheld Pascual Carrion’s claim that a massive golf project in Jumila would leave him with no water for 500 sheep and 70 goats.
The project by developers San Jose Group envisioned the construction of nearly 2,300 homes near a golf course.
This is a second time the Supreme Court had to step in to protect Carrion’s rights.
The original court decision passed last December was challenged by Jumila Town Hall on the grounds that they could not present their arguments.
The Supreme Court’s second ruling now upheld the original decision.
This message was last edited by willsb on 16/01/2011.
0
Like
Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know
|
Hi Willsb,
I am sorry for being curt with you before Christmas, I was going down with flu but that is no excuse , so first please accept my appology.
Regarding the shepherd story:
The Shepherd who owns a section of land which would form part of SADM .HdT were going to pay him €4.5 million for his land but with the new phase 1 did not need his land & Jumilla Town Halll was proceeding with the paper work to produce the final build licences for the new phase 1. The shepherd had commenced court action against HdT and had lost his case in the Murcia courts and went to a final appeal to the "high court" in madrid. His claim was that HdT did not have water and the court in Madrid put a suspension on the Jumilla town hall processing the paper work until this could be resloved. Jumilla town hall have allways maintained that there is enough water & went to court on a point of law and had the suspension suspended.
As HdT did not get the final water licence back in time they were unable to present it to the Madrid court when they ruled that the suspension should be reinstated , I believe as no proof of a water licence had been presented. Typically HdT recieved the water licence at the end of November and have now given it to the court in Madrid and expect a postive resolution and the Jumilla town Hall being able to continue with the process of producing the final build licences for the new phase 1. It is now clear that there is water for SADM to go ahead and HdT now have the water licence and expect to continue with the development of SADM.( A solicitor that we contacted said that it was good news that HdT now had the full water licence.)
This can be seen in the CBN article and the SARC committee are meeting with HdT at the end of the month to go over this and other issues on behalf of the membership and will share any information with every one. This episode with the shepherd although initially purturbing was not as bad as thought by many of the media groups, as they were unaware of the water licence and all being well this matter should be resolved shortly.
The story has been scanned and placed on the SARC website for all to see.
http://www.santaanadelmonte.org/Costa_Blanca_News_Article_-_Friday_31st_Dec_10.jpg
I hope that this explanation is of help and fairly clear.
All the best
Tony
This message was last edited by TonyMal on 16/01/2011.
This message was last edited by TonyMal on 16/01/2011.
This message was last edited by TonyMal on 16/01/2011.
0
Like
Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know
|
|
Seems very confusing I know but this is what is being reported on. It reads, to me, that the shepard has won his fight and that building has been suspended on Santa Ana Development. Also I can find no mention on the Jumilla Town Hall of building work about to, or in the near future being started on Santa Ana.
By m.p. - Dec 27, 2010 - 3:48 PM
It's the second time the Supreme Court has upheld his case to save his grazing land
 Pascual Carrión. Archive photo - Público TV
A Murcia shepherd has, for the second time, won a David over Goliath fight to save his grazing land from a project to build a golf resort in Jumilla.
Pascual Carrión Guardiola had been fighting for years to try and save his land when the Supreme Court ruled to halt the project in December last year, on the shepherd’s argument that the complex would leave him with insufficient water for his animals. The project planned to build a golf course and more than 2,000 new homes.
Carrión’s victory was however put on hold when Jumilla Town Hall lodged an appeal on the grounds that they had not been given an opportunity to present their arguments against his case.
A second ruling from the Supreme Court has now upheld its original decision and has also suspended approval for the project which was given by the governing team at Jumilla Town Hall four years ago.
EFE notes that the ruling, in addition, overturns a 2007 decision from the Murcia High Court which had turned down Carrión’s appeal.
Read more: http://www.typicallyspanish.com/news/publish/article_28471.shtml#ixzz1BQC9gmrd
0
Like
Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know
|
Dave,
I am obviously as confused as you because I have also read more than one article and get the same impression as you that the sheperd is still in the driving seat and the company are needing to go back to court. Speaking to people in the area they are also of the same opinion.
It does appear surprising (even for the speed of things in Spain) that HDT won the vote and very little if anything has really changed. If voters had been told HONESTLY about the ongoing issues which clearly are far from being resolved then maybe some of the marginal voters praying for a miracle and grasping at straws would have voted NO.
HDT/San Jose have a track record of misleading clients including myself, I do feel for those who are so desperate for a property that they are manipulated by the company into believing the hype and accepting every excuse as it is rolled out.
Those fighting the HDT/San Jose corner need to accept the facts of the past years and the dire circumstances of the current situation.
How much longer will people accept the word of this company, would anyone give them a character reference based on their past or current record? I would suggest not!
Mark
_______________________
mark and paula row 4 no 439
0
Like
Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know
|
Yes Dave it is confusing but the December the 2010 Articles * seem to be quite clear in that the shepherd has won his case at the supreme court , more on the water issues than on the misappropriation of the land . This would imply that the responsibility now falls on HdT/SJ to appeal and prove the point ie on water viability - not as Tony suggests just to chuck in a previous water licence.The chance of appeal at this level is very low - unknown in case law !
Seems we are just experiencing the same sad scheme of events that has transpired throughout the years at all SJ sites. Bad legal advice ,conveyencing , planning ,water coursing etc etc etc , in a word useless !!!!
It would seem to me they need a new set of legal eagles .Perhaps this could be Tony's next campaign .
All of this , whether dressed up in frills and flowers by SARC or sold as seen by SJ is pretty much the same . The worst of news for all concerned !!!!!
I for one would appreciate a little modicum of truth and honesty all be it a little tooooo late ! but better late than never !!!! 
0
Like
Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know
|