Friday, September 01, 2006

CEMEX to produce company accounts

Due on the 3rd October at Warwick Court.

Warwick Court No.2. 25th August : Cemex Committal for Sentence: EA to prosecute Cemex for dumping about 4 tonnes dust on local people/houses/cars up to 4 kilometres away - apparently from an open door on 14th October 2005. Cemex had already owned up at Rugby Magistrate's Court, from where the Case had been transferred for sentencing.

The presiding court recorder was not happy as he had just received an unsigned Witness Statement from Cemex, and an internet printout, a 165 page Bundle, and a new report from Professor Harrison at Birmingham University, and in order to be fair to the Company he needed to call for an adjournment for Cemex to provide company accounts.

He had realised there were NO FINANCIAL ACCOUNTS from Cemex. He said that it could mean great ramifications for the Company, when they could be fined an unlimited substantial penalty. He was adjourning it to received written submissions to keep the court focus.

The Recorder mentioned the Milford Haven and Anglian Water Appeals which had been lodged against an amount which the Companies said they could not pay as they "did not have enough money in their piggy bank." It must be a matter for Cemex to bring their accounts (or their piggy banks) and to do Justice we need as much information as possible.

Lucky for Cemex they had "discovered" in a "cloud of pollution" a healthy defending barrister from under the now defunct Southam Rugby Cement plant, who had lived 20 years in Long Itchington "under Smokey Joe" (as all the children called the Southam cement works), and she, being one of the lucky ones, has not got Asthma.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Yes, I was present to witness all within your write-up, and much more. Although your spitting image has made me laugh, I was very worried when I was a victim from the fall-out. What about other dust fall-outs which have occurred long before October 14th. 2005 and since, in particular April 2006 etc. I call for (at least) more prosecutions to be made on the Company. This prosecution is not about a "One off" incident, as it was described to the Rugby Magistrates. Many such incidents have occurred in the past and will occur in the future, whilst the Company is allowed to operate. What ever the "Fine", it can never be "High Enough".

An Honest Campaigner and representative of the people.