Day 312 - 11 Dec 96 - Page 32
1 witnesses.
2
3 The Defendants make the submission with particular
4 reference to the Plaintiffs' attitude to our expert
5 witnesses. Questions of expertise should have been
6 explored with the witness. He or she may well have had
7 vitally important information to give the court on his or
8 her expertise or qualifications. The Plaintiffs' course
9 has deprived the court of any opportunity to hear such
10 additional evidence, and yet the Plaintiffs now invite the
11 court to treat such witnesses as lacking in expertise.
12
13 We say that it is clear that such a course amounts to an
14 abuse of the process of the court.
15
16 MR. MORRIS: Can I hand up a section of... I think it is
17 Hodgkinson on Expert Law and Procedure, I cannot remember
18 the exact name of the book; probably Mr. Rampton
19 remembers. But (handed) I have got the book at home.
20
21 MS. STEEL: The important point of that part of it is this.
22 Page 112.
23
24 MR. MORRIS: It is a very recent edition, I think it is 1994,
25 and it is published by Sweet and Maxwell. I have it at
26 home but I did not bring it. The whole book is just about
27 experts' evidence and procedure.
28
29 MS. STEEL: The important part of this is on page 112. I mean,
30 we might want to refer to other parts later but in respect
31 of this argument that I just put, under section E,
32 cross-examination, No. 1, disputed evidence must be
33 challenged, and it says here "just as a party must in
34 cross-examination challenge evidence of fact given in chief
35 by a lay witness which is not accepted", which you may
36 remember was what we were arguing the other day.
37
38 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I do not accept that.
39
40 MS. STEEL: Well, I will read it anyway because this is our
41 argument.
42
43 MR. JUSTICE BELL: It depends who comes first.
44
45 MS. STEEL: Well, we would say that it is clear that any
46 substantial disagreement must be put to the witness, they
47 must be challenged.
48
49 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I just cannot accept that. This case, long
50 as it has been, would have taken half as long again.
51
52 MS. STEEL: Well...
53
54 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I do not know what the authority for that is,
55 and I do not know what the author's experience of
56 litigation is.
57
58 MS. STEEL: We want to put this as our argument. If I just
59 finish. Just as a party must in cross-examination
60 challenge evidence of fact given in chief by a lay witness
