Jewish couple sue over automatic lights

[mgt23]

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?Jewish_couple_sue_over_automatic_lights&in_article_id=686652&in_page_id=34

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/5550497/Jewish-couple-sue-neighbours-over-automatic-light.html

A Jewish couple are suing their neighbours in a block of flats over automatic light sensors that prevent them from leaving their home on the Sabbath.
As strict orthodox Jews they are not allowed to turn on lights during the holy period as it violates the Biblical rule against igniting a fire.
Gordon and Dena Coleman claim their human rights have been breached and are taking legal action against the management company of their £200,000 holiday apartment for failing to accommodate their religion.
They sent letters to the other 35 flat owners explaining they could 'never again' have full use of the flat they have owned for six years after the hallway sensors were installed six months ago.
The couple suggested a compromise, which would have seen them pay for an override switch that would disable the lights when required. But this was rejected by the resident-led management company at Embassy Court, in Bournemouth, which said it would set an 'unacceptable precedent'.
One resident, who did not wish to be named, said: 'It has caused quite a stir. There have been a lot of arguments.
'I don't think the rest of us would think twice about the lights but they're going to great lengths to get it changed so they must feel strongly about it.'
The Embassy Court management company said the lights were installed in the communal landing area to reduce costs.
The case is due to be heard at Bournemouth county court later this year.

lets see if my home town JP's bow to their masters.

[rmstock]

The article is trying to smudge the Jewish couple by first saying 'they
have sued their neighbors' and two sentences later 'they have sued the
flats' management company'. Then the article(telegraph) claims the
Jewish couple has sued both the  flats' management company and their
neighbors, where the other 35 owners of the seaside flats are liable to
pay the court costs if the claim is successful.

Well, that's not the way to lookout for a happy future in their
£200,000 holiday flat, i would suggest. If the couple wins, the
neighbors will never be friends again. If the couple looses YAWEH will
punish them in hell for switching the lights on at Sabbath.

Is this some kind of April fools article??

[rmstock]

As the 'automatic lights' were installed only six months ago, it could
be that the flats' management company' and/or the other 35 owners of
the seaside flats, don't like the Jewish couple anymore. The only
viable defense the  flats' management company' and/or the other 35
owners have, is proof of deterred security, in the form of Police
reports of harassment or burglary between the couples last visit
of say a year ago and six months ago.

If there's no such police reports and the couple has in writing that
they only moved into the flat in the spring of 2003 on the
understanding that motion sensors would not be installed in communal
areas, they win. If they are smart the costs of prosecution should only
go to the  flats' management company'.

[mastermg]

Makes me want to grab a flashlight and do some "drive-bys" with it  :lol: