Tribal Libel

Another bizzare turn of events at the Manchester Civil Justice Centre today as the University of Salford continued to pursue their libel claim against the author(s) of the Rat Catchers of the Sewers blog.

As ever there was a strong public showing - including individuals who were either there to act as journalists or who simply had a personal preference for taking vast quantities of notes - and the "public gallery" (in reality, a few plastic seats at the back of a square room - the Civil Justice Centre is a little lacking in the 'majestical') was full to capacity.

Confusion reigned for some, as one of the more unusual members of the public turned up late and was evidently overwhelmed by the heirarchical seating arrangements of a court of law. He sought, rather than grabbing the nearest chair, to wander aimlessly until instructed (geddit?) by Ian 'Daffyd' Austin to take the seat closest to the door - probably the safest thing for all concerned.

Today's hearing was for District Judge Smith to determine whether or not to grant an order compelling Virgin Media Group to disclose the user account details associated with the IP addresses of the authors of the statements on the blog that the University claim are defamatory.

After the previous 'session', in which District Judge Smith instructed Counsel for the Claimant to supply a witness statement arguing as to the falsity of the statements under question (and there were we naively thinking falsity was presumed in English defamation proceedings?), our old friend Dr Adrian Graves duly complied with the request, supplying a virtually identical witness statement to that authored by 'Daffyd' Austin some weeks before - with the added caveat of alleging falsity.

Dr Graves is deserving of particular mention at this point, as he has achieved the almost impossible feat of amassing almost as many official roles as did Lord Mandleson in the previous Labour Government (Dr Graves is listed in University Council minutes - which he is responsible for - as 'Deputy Vice Chancellor and Registrar and Secretary', although this is not quite a match for 'Baron Mandleson of Hartlepool; First Secretary of State; Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills; Lord President of the Council; and President of the Board of Trade). 

Today's hearing was kicked off by the University's barrister, who explained that the instructing solicitor (our old friend 'Daffyd' Austin) and Virgin Media had agreed a form for the Court Order which would go unopposed by Virgin. There was then a request to extend the time limit for serving notice on the defendant (since obviously the defendant(s) remain unknown at present).

This was countered by an unending and somewhat incomprehensible rebuttal from a Mr E Longley - acting as the MacKenzie friend for Dr Gary Duke (the presumed author). His arguments seemed to revolve around three points of "law":

1) The IP addresses were 'illegally obtained' and thus should not be rendered admissable.

2) The comments complained of were not arguably false/defamatory.

3) The application to extend the time limit should be declined owing to supposed dithering on the part of the Claimant's solicitor.

Needless to say the Judge was having none of this and ruled in favour of the Claimants on the day's substantive issues, including ruling that all of the statements complained of were indeed arguably defamatory and arguably false (although there appeared to be some hesitance regarding allegations made against one of the claimants).

There was some commotion about the wording of the court order which was to be submitted to Virgin Media, with the Judge asserting that he will only approve an order which requests disclosure of the statements complained of (i.e. not indiscriminate disclosure).

The problem here was that neither the University's Solicitor or Barrister were in a position to issue assurances that the data sought in the proposed order corresponded to the author(s) of the statements complained of. Our friend Ian Austin seemed confident that the order could be revised to achieve this aim in less than 24 hours, and both the Judge and the Barrister agreed that the order could be amended so that Virgin can identify which IP addresses were responsible for the statements complained of.

There was some doubt about the technical feasibility of this proposal, as it is not routine for Internet Service Providers to retain mirrors of uploaded data from their user connections. In the event Virgin are unable to comply with this particular element of the request, one can only presume that Salford will need to go back to Automatic Inc for further information.

Whether or not Automatic Inc comply on a voluntary basis again (as before), or actually wait for a disclosure order from the Californian courts, will be very interesting to see. One imagines that the negative publicity generated as a result of their previous voluntary disclosure might discourage them from making further such disclosures.

Either way, it now seems to be just a matter of time before the author(s) is/are identified. What will become of them? In court today the University's Barrister seemed to imply that mediation would be entered in to and apologies would be sought before any judicial remedy was pursued. Whether or not this will abait the desires of the claimants to 'have their day in court' is another issue.


More to follow.

Ticking away, the moments that make up a dull day

The latest Council Minutes are, as ever, illuminating.

First on the order list is confirmation of Councillor Derek Antrobus being appointed for a three year period of office. Cllr Antrobus is Lead Member for Planning on the Labour controlled Salford City Council, and is much loved throughout Salford for his propensity for saying one thing and doing something entirely different. Given this he should fit in perfectly with his new colleagues.

No time was wasted in getting straight to the point with Antrobus on board, for at that very meeting emphasis was drawn to discussions that "were ongoing with Salford City Council about the acquisition of properties that were integral to the delivery of the estates master plan."

More interesting is the use Salford might wish to make of Cllr Antrobus during his three year membership of Council - given that they're going to need planning permission for some of their rather ambitious 'Estates Master Plans' (a stupid name, we agree), it's going to be helpful to have the Lead Member for Planning from the City Council on your board of trustees!

Under the section about 'University League Tables' there is not a single word of discussion recorded about the University reaching an all time low in this year's tables - being ranked 100th in the Guardian's ranking system. Instead the minutes just record everybody patting each other on the back about how much better things are undoubtedly going to get.


The final point of concern was KPMG's assessment that the delivery of a European Regional Development Fund contract being deemed "unacceptable". This apparently was down to "the system of internal control, risk management and governance for the project being unacceptable".

No doubt we will never find out more details regarding this.

Rewriting History?

We are interested to see that Ian Austin's biography on Salford's 'Council Biographies' website has enjoyed an extensive re-write, in light of recent events. Just a few weeks ago, the website proclaimed, hubristically:

Independently ranked as one of the “most dynamic figures in the North West market,” Ian Austin is a prominent player in the region. He grew up in Cheshire and has remained firmly rooted in the North West throughout his career – from completing his law degree at Chester Law School to guiding Halliwells through a series of bold initiatives that saw it become Manchester’s largest law firm. In 2004, at 42, Ian was elected managing partner and he immediately began delivering his vision of the firm, completing a comprehensive rebrand of Halliwell Landau to Halliwells LLP that same year. He also established a foothold in Liverpool through the successful merger with Cuff Roberts, followed in 2006 by joining forces with James Chapman & Co which boosted Halliwells to becoming the region’s largest law firm. Ian’s achievements and efforts didn’t go unnoticed and perhaps one of his career highlights to date was being awarded Management Partner of the Year at the 2006 Legal Business Awards. The judges described him as having “an astute hiring and merger policy and an infectious enthusiasm”. In December 2007 he welcomed the entire Manchester workforce to the impressive new Spinningfields district when Halliwells relocated to 3 Hardman Square. With Ian’s guidance Halliwells has adopted a modern corporate structure and maps out innovative career paths for its staff. Strong leadership, business focus, open communications and sound financial management are his trademarks but his achievements go far beyond the realm of business. He sits on the development committee of The Prince’s Trust and has championed a number of fundraising campaigns – so far raising £450,000 for The Prince’s Trust, Claire House Children’s Hospice and the Cavendish Centre. He was also behind the decision to sponsor two of the most exciting young athletes in the UK; Francesca Halsall and Shelly Woods. This support enabled them fly the flag for Britain at the 2008 Beijing Olympics and both are currently busy preparing for London 2012. After recently taking up the position of Executive Chairman, Ian is responsible for running the main board and focuses his efforts on the firm’s commercial objectives and strategy. For more than five years he has guided Halliwells through a period of accelerated growth and remains committed to its success and long term future. Ian enjoys strong links with the Manchester business community and regularly speaks at conferences and events. He also comments regularly in the regional, national and trade media on business trends, leadership and the economy. Ian Austin lives with his wife and children in Ormskirk.

 

So it is interesting to see that a new, more toned-down version of Mr Austin's biography has since been posted to the website:

 

Ian Austin - partner, Heatons.   Ian Austin is one of the region's leading lawyers having practiced in Manchester for over 20 years. He has specialised in commercial litigation throughout this period and acts for a wide range of companies, institutions and individuals.  Ian has extensive experience in dealing with high value claims and, where appropriate, uses alternative forms of dispute resolution (including mediation) to resolve disputes.  He enjoys strong links with the Manchester business community and regularly speaks at conferences and events.   He is also a keen supporter of The Prince's Trust and has been closely involved in helping to support the trust and fundraising.   Ian lives with his wife and children in Mawdesley, Lancashire.

 

Eh? No mention of Halliwells? Awards? Leadership? Economics? What on earth could have changed between then and now that would prompt such a toned-down biography?

 

One can but wonder. 

The Man With A Plan

Everybody's favourite Property Litigator - Ian 'Daffyd' Austin - has been receiving warm messages of adulation in the press again. This week, the Manchester Evening News reported administrators BDO as stating that all the former FS and Equity Partners from Halliwells LLP will be interviewed in the New Year (we think possibly designed to co-incide with when the tax man seeks to collect his share). We are quite sure that both the former Fixed-Share and Equity members will stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Austin and support him all the way.

The University of Salford - in a rare spectacle of actually complying with a Freedom of Information Request, even if it took them almost three months - have supplied expenses data about moneys paid to Halliwells LLP during the previous two financial years.

This comes to a total of circa. £20,000, with £17,000 of that being spent in the most recent financial year.

We anticipate that the majority of that £17,000 might have been spent upon pursuing the author(s) of the Rat Catchers of the Sewers blog.

Reading the Pre-Action correspondence sent to Dr Gary Duke (the presumed author), Ian Austin's initials are contained within the reference at the top of the page. This, naturally, raises several questions, such as:

1) How did Halliwells - and presumably Austin - come to be appointed to handle this case? Austin is said to be a specialist in Property Law (ironic!) and not defamation law. Surely there were more experienced candidates for the work?

2) Since during the previous financial year, University Council members were not legally permitted to receive any financial remuneration from the University - including for the procurement of services - who approved this expenditure?

3) Did Austin benefit from this expenditure? If so, there is a prima facie case for getting the pertinent Charity Regulators involved to assess the legality of this decision.

Of similar interest is the connection of the man who requested this information - Al Goodwin - to Halliwells LLP. Al Goodwin is a Senior Associate at Burges Salmon, a Bristol based firm of solicitors (and a very good one at that).

So what interest could they possibly have in this case? Well, reading a little further, it turns out that when Halliwells went belly up earlier this year, and a sizeable number of fresh Law graduates and recent recruits lost their Training Contracts/positions as a result, Burges Salmon took on a fair number of them to rescue them from destitution (quite generous!).

We anticipate that a fair number of 'state secrets' from Halliwells LLP might well have migrated with them. So do they know something we don't about Austin's relationship with Salford's procurement of legal services? Only time will tell.

UoS Annual Accounts 2010 - Full Analysis

Yes, it's that time of year again, where the general public get to pick through the details of the University of Salford's Annual Accounts. This year, there have been some important revisions to how the accounts are presented (undoubtedly as a result of the firestorm of negative publicity which followed some of the contents of last year's). We shall go through the highlights in order to avoid this analysis getting too convoluted:

1) There is no mention of Ian Austin's professional endeavours.

2) There is a brief mention of the decision for Mr John Corner to 'stand down' from his position on University Council as a result of his remunerated employment as the University's Director at MediaCityUK. There is, of course, no mention of the fact that his appointment (and possibly his remuneration) was announced before the University's newly amended Charter (permitting remuneration for members of Council) was approved by the Privy Council. There is also no mention that Mr Corner's name as a member of University Council was only removed from the list of members after a certain article appeared in Private Eye back in August.

3) In the Vice-Chancellor's statement, Professor Hall talks in riddles about the implications of the Browne Review, which we do not think he fully understands. We will summarise the implications for him, as he seems not to have managed to grasp them himself - there will be a 100% reduction of teaching grant in the Arts and Humanities. STEM subjects will retain subsidy but only those approved by the Department for BIS as being eligible. It is the intention for tuition fee income to replace HEFCE subsidy for the majority of undergraduate teaching.

4) The ambitious plan of yesteryear to increase student numbers by (at the time) 20% to a total of 24,000 students has been quietly dropped. Some of us, at the time, hinted that this was never going to happen.

5) Student numbers dipped slightly on last year.

6) A £20m loan was drawn in order to part-finance the MediaCityUK development.

7) Borrowing is set to increase by £30m over the next five years, principally to fund capital investments as part of the Estates Master Plan.

8) A profit of £250,000 was made on the sale of the former Vice-Chancellor, Professor Michael Harloe's, private cottage - called 'Holly Cottage'.

9) Pension liability fell by some £11m - this was largely explained by the decision in the Coalition Government's budget to restore the link between pensions and the Consumer Prices Index rather than the Retail Prices Index (this accounted for some £6.9m of reduction in liability). The remainder of the reduction is put down to the rallying of international stock markets (which, at the time of the last Annual Accounts, were in total disarray). [On a side note, we do not entirely agree with the £6.9m reduction in liability as a result of the government changing the inflationary index to which they will peg pension increases - VAT is due to increase to 20% from Jan 1 2010 and the BoE have not ruled out further quantitative easing. Whilst this reduction in liability was made on actuarial advice, we think the advice might be somewhat optimistic]

10) Whilst HEFCE grants grew by £4m, research grants fell by some £0.8m. Tuition fees from 'Home' students (i.e. those from within the EU studying for a first degree) rose by £6m, whereas tuition fees from students charged overseas rates (i.e. non-EU students and EU students studying for a second degree) fell by some £0.7m. Part time student income rose slightly.

11) Wages/salary costs dipped slightly, but the quantity of staff fell by ~150 and we presume the increased expenditure on Agency/Temp staff might offset the savings here.

12) The Early Retirement/Voluntary Severance scheme (which it was recently resolved to amend) has inflated from a mere £121k last year to a staggering £1.4m this year. With this in mind, it is not altogether surprising the University are seeking to make the schemes more affordable.

13) Professor Martin Hall is earning considerably less than his predecessor - a notional £83,000 less in salary than was Professor Michael Harloe at the point of his departure. However, he is accepting pension contributions, which totalled some £30k for the financial year. Throw in 'benefits in kind' and total emoluments to Professor Hall were some £223,000. This is still £84,000 less than total emoluments awarded to Professor Harloe in the previous year. However, if one reads the Annual Accounts of the University of Cape Town (which, naturally, we have), Professor Hall's acceptance of his position at Salford still resulted in a de facto near-tripling of the salary he was receiving whilst serving as Deputy Vice-Chancellor at UCT (based on current conversion rates), although it must be pointed out that he resigned the role of DVC at UCT many months before his tenure began at Salford.

14) The 14 highest paid members of staff at the University collectively received at least ~£1.7m in remuneration.

15) The accounts note than a senior member of staff left in 09/10 and received an ex-gratia payment of £30,000. We think this might have been Professor Gill Nicholls, but obviously cannot confirm. Note that £30,000 is the maximum ex-gratia payment that can be awarded for loss of office without incurring tax liability.

16) Remarkably, there is some transparency on the costs of Council Retreat - 11 members attended in the previous year, at a cost of some £3,162. It would be interesting to see what this money actually was spent on, but perhaps that his hoping for too much.

17) In a similar vein of transparency, we learn that £7,364 was paid in expenses to 7 Council members in respect of Travel, Hotel and Course Costs. Again we would like to see what this money actually went on.

Expenses

18) There has been substantial revision of the method of presenting the expenses contained under the sub-heading "Other Operating Expenses", which last year generated so much controversy (and continue to do so, for at the time of writing the University is yet publish the data on what the staggering sum of £30m+ was spent on).

19) For this reason, the accounts this year provide a more detailed (but ultimately still rather opaque) reflection of the purposes for which moneys were declared as expenses. This brings the University of Salford's accounts in to line with the majority of UK University Annual Accounts, which have for years been presenting their expenditure in a similar fashion.

20) The sheer quantity of expenses has in no way diminished - in fact it has risen by circa. £3m.

21) £1.2m was spent on catering; £3.6m was spent on Equipment & Furniture (including hire/maintenance); £750,000 was spent on financial charges; £633,000 was spent on consumables (this ordinarily includes chemicals, materials for scientific experiments etc); £543,000 was spent on vehicle and transport costs; £8.5m was spent on 'professional and other fees'; £4.5m was spent on agency staff; £3.698m was spent on 'staff travel and subsistence costs'; £7.7m was spent on 'premises, maintenance and repair'.

22) These are still substantial sums of money. Some items of expenditure also seem to have disappeared from the balance sheet - for instance, last year's accounts included a sub-heading "Household Expenditure" in excess of £200,000. Either this sort of expenditure has been terminated (unlikely) or it has simply been subsumed into other headings.

23) The internal-auditors (KPMG) are described as being remunerated for non-audit work.We assume this relates to their consultancy role at the inception of the current IT replacement project. If so, KPMG were rewarded with a rather handsome £192,000.

A brief ode to Simon Attwell

Simon Attwell has been the University of Salford's Finance Director for several years now. He has displayed immense patience in this role and in dealing with students and, having presented these Annual Accounts for the previous financial year, is due to retire at the end of this month. We wish him well in his retirement, which we are sure he will enjoy to the fullest.

Comment

Whatever way one looks at it, this year's Annual Accounts detail a truly enormous amount of reform and activity taking place at the University of Salford. This, no doubt, is a result of the fresh energies brought to bear on stale problems by Professor Martin Hall, who is an unquestionably talented academic leader. Simply reading through the quantity of changes being enacted is itself staggering.

Yet again, operational expenses have increased. It is difficult for us - and no doubt readers - to place much confidence in the veracity of this expenditure without seeing a detailed breakdown.

The highest paid 14 members of staff are taking home a disproportionately large salary - at least £1.7 million is being split between them. Professor Hall's considerably lesser salary than his predecessor, whilst commendable in some respects, is in others simply a reflection of this being his first year of tenure. The real test of the man will be in seeing whether or not the 14%+ pay rises of his predecessor continue as normal, or whether he is willing to exercise fiscal restraint in his own remuneration. As has been mentioned, his 'mere' £220,000 is still a de facto tripling of the remuneration he is reported as receiving in the UTC Annual Accounts for his post as Deputy Vice-Chancellor with lead responsibility for Transformation Policies (a South African constitutional requirement).

Once the outcome of the current round of FoI requests is dealt with, we will attempt to glean data on the expenses described in this year's annual accounts and assess the veracity of the expenditure for ourselves.

Salford at "Medium Risk"

A report published today by the University and Colleges Union suggests that Salford is at 'Medium Risk' after the implementation of funding changes instigated by the Browne review. 'Medium Risk' of what you might ask? Well, we're not entirely sure - risk of insecurity of income seems to be what the report implies.

And it is true to say that the government decision to withdraw all funding from the Arts and Humanities will hit Salford very hard indeed. Even those 'technical' degrees that Salford offer which might appear to qualify for HEFCE subsidy might not do so, as the government actually have a list of 'approved' degree courses that they are willing to subsidise (and umpteen different ways of teaching Media Studies & Video Technology are unlikely to meet the cut - no pun intended).

So is this medium risk assessment accurate? In our opinion, no. The UCU report only assesses four different criteria, all of which are concerned with income. Salford has an ambitious expenditure programme planned for the coming years, and expensive commitments at MediaCityUK (although they are still refusing, under the Freedom of Information Act, to release details about the cost of the lease they have signed with Peel Holdings).

So 'Medium Risk' might be oversimplifying things. The report also assesses proportion of income gleaned from non-EU domiciled students, and uses a higher percentage as minimising risk. But it fails to take account of government plans to cap and regulate the number of non-EU students that may undertake study here, and to introduce more stringent English Language requirements for those applying. This is likely to introduce fluctuations to an insitution's capacity to recruit non-EU domiciled students.

The Matrix is everywhere...

"What if there were two worlds?" laments Professor Hall, quoting the Economist with more zeal than a thespian at the RSC, "the real one and its digital reflection? If a door opens in the real world, so does its digital reflection."

Enthusiasts of the fantastical will be pleased to hear that such binary-inspired theoretical acrobatics have already been handled with aplomb: