MISFEASANCE Vs MALFEASANCE, NONFEASANCE
Misfeasance, Nonfeasance and Malfeasance are types of failure to discharge public obligations existing by common law, custom or statute.
Definition and relevant rules of law
When a contract creates a duty that does not exist at common law, there are three things the parties can do wrong:
v Dytham 1979 (467 3 WLR) Court of Appeal
Police & law enforcement Constable witnessing an assault failed to preserve the peace or protect the victim or arrest assailants was convicted of wilful neglect. So upheld at appeal: Omitting to take steps to protect the person of the man or to arrest his assailants or otherwise bring them to justice constitutes the crime of failing to carry out a duty of his office.
v Bowden 1995 Court of Appeal (98 1 WLR)
Regarding local authority employees - the common law offence of misconduct in public office applies generally to every person who is appointed to discharge a public duty and who receives compensation in whatever form – salary, wage, expenses and the like.
AN EXAMPLE OF MISFEASANCE, MALFEASANCE & NONFEASANCE
Wealden District Council had secured a part award of costs in relation to their attempts to deprive poor old Nelson of his right to a toilet and washing facilities while at work. Talk about victimization! The only man in England not to be allowed to defecate and urinate in some kind of comfort while at work.
That was the level of confidence Wealden's officers thought they held sway through the courts, that they could get any order, even one that the court had no power to make. David Phillips was the enforcement officer that was out to get Mr Kruschandl and he attended before Dame Butler-Sloss with a bevy of officers sitting back in the courtroom. He was aided and abetted by Vic Scarpa and his apprentice hatchet lady, Christine Nuttall. They of course had other legal advice paid for by the rate payer.
It did not stop there for that is impossible in an organization as corrupt in their practices as Wealden. Trevor Abbott and Trevor Scott are known to have been in the background, especially when they got caught out, with Daniel Goodwin coming to the rescue with the following Consent Order which he signed on behalf of his Council, the idea being, presumably, to quiet-ten things down so that they could deal the final blow after they had pulled the teeth from Nelson's claim as to institutionalized discrimination and/or negligence.
The point here is that when more than one person is involved in at attempt to coerce a court to break the law, it becomes a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. We think we have demonstrated here that there was obviously more than one officer in the mix. It gets worse of course, because in order to use public money to pursue Mr Kruschandl at this level of expense to the tax payer, the officers first had to secure approval from the members of this Council. In this case it would have been the Area Plans South sub-committee- and it was Roy Martin who presided as chairman when David Phillips advised the gathering, an unlawful assembly as it now seems, that he and his co--conspirators were "looking to enforce."
You can read this for yourself in the transcript - and if you are in law enforcement in England, or policy making in any one of England's Governments, Conservative, Labour, Liberal or UKIP, you can request a copy of the recording to satisfy yourself as to the accuracy of the Transcript dated the 25th of July 1998. There is no limitation in statute for the prosecution of a crime of this magnitude. It is surely in the public interest to make an example of those involved.
LINKS & REFERENCE
THIS SITE CONTAINS MANY EXAMPLES OF THIS COUNCIL'S ILLEGAL BEHAVIORAL TENDENCIES - With thanks to Action Groups across the country for the supply of real case history and supporting documents. *THAT THE PUBLIC MAY KNOW*
Vicarage Lane, Hailsham,
East Sussex, BN27 2AX T: 01323 443322
This site is free of © Copyright except where specifically stated. Any person may download, use and quote any reference or any link, and is guaranteed such right to freedom of information and speech under the Human Rights and Freedom of Information Acts. However, be aware that we cannot be held liable for the accuracy of the information provided. All users should therefore research matters for themselves and seek their own legal advice and this information is provided simply by way of a guide. Horse Sanctuary UK Limited.