Day 094 - 01 Mar 95 - Page 42
1 trained to be put on a line. If you put them on a line and
2 he does not do it properly, it affects the entire process.
3 So, they have to be trained to be there, or else they could
4 not run the lines at the speed that they want. They will
5 have no conformities. The US DA might stop the lines, so
6 they have to be trained. It is not by choice.
7
8 Q. You assume then that they would be trained because if they
9 were not there would be problems?
10 A. That is correct.
11
12 Q. So do you personally actually know that that training was
13 in place?
14 A. I have not seen it, no.
15
16 MR. RAMPTON: If Ms. Steel has evidence that they are not
17 trained, then she is obliged to put it to the witness.
18
19 MR. JUSTICE BELL: You said just before the adjournment that a
20 Civil Evidence Act notice had been put on -- did you say
21 some of the statements in this article?
22
23 MR. RAMPTON: No, I did not say that. What I said was this
24 article is pleaded in the Defence. What I said was that,
25 as far as I am aware, there was no admissible evidence to
26 support it. There is no witness statement or anything.
27
28 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I see. I misheard.
29
30 MS. STEEL: Can we ask for a Civil Evidence Act notice to be put
31 on this then, because if it has not been done it is
32 basically because of an oversight.
33
34 MR. RAMPTON: My Lord, for once in my life I think I would
35 object to that for this reason, that this particular
36 article has been in the pleading for a very long time.
37 True it is that, according to the Court of Appeal (and one
38 must abide by their decision), a defendant is now entitled
39 to plead something on the faith of an article. It also
40 remains the case that the contents of the article are not
41 admissible evidence and never can be.
42
43 If in good time a party pleading decides that he or she
44 will put a Civil Evidence Act notice on a particular
45 article, then one has to look at the particular statements
46 which are relied on to see how many degrees of hearsay they
47 contain. Then, with respect, the court must say to itself,
48 because now it being miles and miles and miles out of time,
49 your Lordship must exercise a discretion, the court must
50 ask itself the question whether it is fair to do so.
51
52 If it had been done in proper order at the proper time, it
53 might be, for example, that I should have prepared evidence
54 to deal with these particular allegations. I might, for
55 example, have gone through them with Dr. Gomez Gonzalez
56 before he gave evidence. I might even have had a witness
57 from Montfort; I know not. But to say, simply so that the
58 Defendants can now have a case which they have never had in
59 the past: "We want to put a Civil Evidence Act statement
60 on the whole of this article" is, in my respectful
