RE: lbjj3 Jan 2020 16:38
Hi Aug. Interesting points.
Baylan, I would say, can't prove that the applicaton is being prioritised though Aug. Priority supposedly given almost nine months ago now, but we must note that the application was sat on (again) by the Government for a year or more before that. Seven years in April we'll have waited, and are still having to deal with a Minister who is most reluctant to communicate with our Company. With any form of usual priority, reasonable priority as we know it, the applicant surely would be given at least a rough idea of when a decision on its case would be likely. Otherwise, how can anyone say that something is being given priority, if all that means is a decision will come whenever. It is appropriate that a process is transparent, so that the applicant can see where the case is being held up, and, moreover, if there is a real reason for that, other than one of extreme lethargy. Lol.
Priority given, then waiting yet another nine months, is nothing of the sort. We also have the acknowledgment, before priority was supposedly given, that BEM had already waited an excessive amount of time for a decision on its application.
Then we have the CAB's mischief. Lol.
There is more than one point to be made by BEM, if this needs to be taken via any court.
Baylan hasn't got a leg to stand on, so the notion that the Swedish Government can point to this or that. all in the name of still prioritising, is surely incorrect.
In my opinion only Aug.
Happy New Year, ya beauty!