So I did some more research into this case. It appears that there wasn't an actual back and forth between the plaintiff and the defendant in this case. There was merely a default judgement because the defendant didn't show up in court to defend himself. I wouldn't call that a "win".
Here is the linked in post from Liz Fong-Jones' lawyer Toby Mullen, who himself admits that the case he "won" is, quote, "undefended", thus essentially admitting he just got lucky because the defendant didn't show up:
Liz Fong-Jones responds saying:
So, the only reason Liz Fong-Jones has "won" this case was because Vincent was too busy playing Dota2 on Steam with Null and the Russians to bother getting a lawyer to defend himself. I don't consider that an actual win, Liz Fong-Jones just got lucky that the defendant in this case was "too busy playing Dota2" (read: fucking retarded) to defend himself. Vincent clearly has no idea how the legal system works, and apparently thinks that a judge can just decide on his own whether to throw out a case or not, with no input needed or allowed from the defendant. If that was the case, no one would ever need a defense lawyer, judges would just read motions and decide on their own whether to grant whatever the plaintiff is asking. You, as a defendant, get sued in order to go in court and tell your side of the story to convince the judge otherwise. Even if a case is very obviously spurious and bad faith, you still have to go to court and tell the judge the freaking obvious. It fucking sucks but that's the legal system.
In other words, there was no actual arguments being made in court in this case, there was only a default judgement being issued, essentially punishing Vincent for being too retarded to show up in court. We can only hope that Null's 先生 takes some time of from playing Dota2 to file a timely appeal.
In fact, the article that was published about his case in The Guardian admits as much, that the actual legal argument made by Liz Fong-Jones in this case remains unaddressed because Vincent didn't defend himself:
Here is the linked in post from Liz Fong-Jones' lawyer Toby Mullen, who himself admits that the case he "won" is, quote, "undefended", thus essentially admitting he just got lucky because the defendant didn't show up:
Liz Fong-Jones responds saying:
So, the only reason Liz Fong-Jones has "won" this case was because Vincent was too busy playing Dota2 on Steam with Null and the Russians to bother getting a lawyer to defend himself. I don't consider that an actual win, Liz Fong-Jones just got lucky that the defendant in this case was "too busy playing Dota2" (read: fucking retarded) to defend himself. Vincent clearly has no idea how the legal system works, and apparently thinks that a judge can just decide on his own whether to throw out a case or not, with no input needed or allowed from the defendant. If that was the case, no one would ever need a defense lawyer, judges would just read motions and decide on their own whether to grant whatever the plaintiff is asking. You, as a defendant, get sued in order to go in court and tell your side of the story to convince the judge otherwise. Even if a case is very obviously spurious and bad faith, you still have to go to court and tell the judge the freaking obvious. It fucking sucks but that's the legal system.
In other words, there was no actual arguments being made in court in this case, there was only a default judgement being issued, essentially punishing Vincent for being too retarded to show up in court. We can only hope that Null's 先生 takes some time of from playing Dota2 to file a timely appeal.
In fact, the article that was published about his case in The Guardian admits as much, that the actual legal argument made by Liz Fong-Jones in this case remains unaddressed because Vincent didn't defend himself:
