M. D. Eastwood
/
Overview & Briefing 4
Judicial Briefing Guide for Court How the Cases Connect The Story
Orders Sought 4
Relief Sought 33 Quantum (£8.2M+ pleaded) Why One Judge Must Hear All Settlement Exposure The Costs Trap
Void Ab Initio 29:0
29 Adverse : 0 Favourable 1 in 537M 21 Void Orders (All Void) MHCM Calendar Defence Admissions Defence Contradictions Equality of Arms Filing Pattern (0/12 RA) Staff Impact (6 Resignations) Gaslighting 13
No Time Bar Applies 9 Grounds
Grounds of Voidness 23
CA-2024-001353 · s.31A SCA 1981
Appeal Overview 23 Grounds of Voidness Argument Map KB Hearing (7 June) Waiver/Estoppel
Judicial Review 12
7 bodies · 34 ECHR · permission sought
JR Targets 7 ECHR Violations 34 Institutional Failures Solicitor Misconduct Transcript Obstruction 0/12 Adjustments Granted Subject Access Requests SAR Tracker 3 overdue Pre-Action Letters Constitutional DWP Judicial Review Wheelchair Ramp
The 6 Cases 6
Chelsea Harbour Ltd (R1) Lower Richmond Properties Ltd & Vista (London) Ltd (R2, R3) Personal Damages Insolvency KB Injunction Defendants
Evidence & Documents 11
103 exhibits · 160 authorities · 1395 events
Evidence Hub Exhibits 103 Gallery Chronology 1395 Authorities 160 Key Quotes Revenue & DCF Costs Analysis OR Response + 15 Enclosures Applications All Documents
Reference & Tools 14
Ask the Case Search / Master Timeline Order Timeline CPR Heatmap CPR Dictionary Citation Index Glossary Evidence Trails Document Timeline Evidence Matrix Evidence Audit Argument Index Data Health Open Justice Assurance and Governance Health Report
🌱 Built with Eden Legal AI
✓ visited · ? shortcuts clear
Ground OV-1
https://www.michaeldariuseastwood.com/legal
Legal/Grounds/OV-1

OV-1

29:0 Adverse Decision Ratio

LOCKED

Supports both bias (appeal) and irrationality (JR). 28 consecutive adverse outcomes. P < 1 in 536,870,912.

Supporting Evidence

Authorities (2)

  • Porter v Magill [2002] 2 AC 357
  • Essop v Home Office [2017] UKSC 27

Exhibits (1)

  • CA-PROC-001 Procedural Mismanagement Evidence

Evidence Chain (1 proof trails)

EC-014 OVERWHELMING (10/10)
29:0 adverse decision ratio
Primary Evidence
data/adverse_decisions.json (28 decisions catalogued) STATISTICAL_ANALYSIS CONCLUSIVE

Each of the 28 decisions is individually documented with date, judge, and order reference.

Corroborating Evidence (6)
  • FACT-007 (Probability: 1 in 536,870,912) MATHEMATICAL CONCLUSIVE
  • FACT-008 (Claimant success rate 0%) STATISTICAL CONCLUSIVE
  • FACT-009 (Defendant success rate 100%) STATISTICAL CONCLUSIVE
  • F-CASE-CHELSEA-DEFAULT (540+ days default) CONTEXTUAL STRONG
  • FACT-PROCEDURAL-001 (16+ applications, 0% success) STATISTICAL CONCLUSIVE
  • Essop v Home Office [2017] UKSC 27 LEGAL_AUTHORITY STRONG
Overall Strength: OVERWHELMING

Where This Appears

Case Assignment

ChelseaLRP/VistaPersonalInsolvency

Linked Facts (3)

FACT-006 FACT-007 FACT-ASYMMETRY-001

Linked Exhibits (1)

MDE-EVD-001

Linked Authorities (3)

Porter v Magill [2002] 2 AC 357 Essop v Home Office [2017] UKSC 27 AUTH-STAT-024
Admin Notice Parts: · Relief: · All Grounds · Relief Sought · Argument Map

© 2026 Michael Darius Eastwood. Published under the open justice principle.

Legal Disclaimer · All Cases

Evidence
Open in full page