Truss is upset that Starmer has said some hurty things about her trashing the economy. She has sent him a cease and desist letter. Letters to all the financial institutions next for being leftists?
Liz ‘I must not be compared to a lettuce’ Truss has been applauded for being a free speech champion. In August 2024 she was supporting the owner of X against accusations of stoking up riots in the UK with Xcretions about civil war, and the EU asking him not to indulge in misinformation.
In September 2022 she was promoting free speech as part of the discussion about the Online Safety Bill. She is very keen on free speech. So she has come in for a LOT of mockery over the letter from her solicitor to Starmer telling him to ‘cease and desist’ with his accusations that she crashed the economy. Perhaps free speech is only for people who say things she agrees with.
She is now in a huff because Starmer made several references to her crashing the economy during the run up to the election in July 2024. She is also blaming his comments for her losing her parliamentary seat. Presumably she is also going to send whiny letters to the Tory MPs involved in removing her from the Prime Minister position.
There are a lot of problems with the letter that was sent that make it unlikely that an experienced barrister such as Starmer would take it seriously.
We are not knowledgeable regarding law, but David Allen Green is. In a detailed analysis he concludes…
- It sets no deadline.
- It sets out no ultimatum.
- It asks for no undertakings
- It does not set out what relief or remedies will be sought if Starmer does not comply
- It is a cease-and-desist letter that fails even to say what would happen
- if Starmer does not cease or desist.It is a weak litigation letter – about as weak a letter as could be sent in the circumstances.
One important aspect is the delay in this letter being sent. The legal protocol that this is using requires the Claimant “should notify the Defendant of his/her claim in writing at the earliest reasonable opportunity”. Given that the letter refers to comments from May 2024, there is an unacceptable delay.
The best thing would be for her to take it to court where there is a reasonable chance that it could be decided that she did in fact ‘crash the economy’ to as reasonable degree of proof. Unfortunately under
Of course the letter is a lame bit of gesturing and she is unlikely, unless she is phenomenally stupid, to risk a court adjudicating that she did indeed ‘crash the economy’.