Day 157 - 18 Jul 95 - Page 38


     
     1        We would ask for leave to appeal, ask you to give us leave
     2        to appeal on any or all of the applications.  Obviously,
     3        that is at your discretion.  Then, pending that appeal, to
     4        seek that we should have an adjournment, obviously, because
     5        if it needs to be resolved, that whether it would be fair
     6        for the trial to continue without us having transcripts,
     7        then it should not continue with us not having transcripts
     8        until that matter is resolved.
     9
    10        That is all I have to say at the moment.
    11
    12   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Yes.  Do you want to say anything, Ms. Steel?
    13
    14   MS. STEEL:   Yes, but actually I was about to say half of what
    15        Dave has just said, so I am just trying to cut out the bits
    16        so that I am not too repetitive.
    17
    18   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Only address me if there is something new
    19        that you wish to say.
    20
    21   MS. STEEL:   I just wanted to say, to reiterate, there is no
    22        reason why we should give any undertaking to the
    23        Plaintiffs.  There are no similar conditions on their use
    24        of transcript.  Why should we be forced to accept all
    25        manner of unnecessary restrictions and conditions just
    26        because we do not have the resources of a multinational
    27        Company?
    28
    29        If we had agreed to the original restrictions and
    30        conditions that the Plaintiffs were seeking to get us to
    31        agree to last week, we would have signed away what we were
    32        legally entitled to do.  To be quite honest, it would not
    33        surprise me if what is in their current so-called "offer"
    34        goes beyond what we would be legally entitled to use the
    35        transcripts for.  There is no written provision for any
    36        such undertaking in any of the law books that we have seen.
    37
    38        The conditions that they are trying to set down are
    39        completely impractical, that if we want to show it to
    40        witnesses we have to ensure its immediate return.  We have
    41        witnesses all around the world.  What are we supposed
    42        to do?  Send off copies of the transcripts to Canada and
    43        Australia and then spending ages chasing them up on the
    44        phone to make sure they send them back the following week?
    45        The whole is, I mean, just totally impractical.  I do
    46        believe, as Dave has just said, they gave their game away
    47        last week when they would not even agree to let us have the
    48        transcripts at the reduced rate immediately rather than
    49        waiting three weeks.  This is about trying to sabotage our
    50        defence and our preparation for cross-examination of 
    51        witnesses and other matters that we have to prepare and do 
    52        in court. 
    53
    54        I think it would be reasonable to strike out the
    55        Plaintiffs' case and award costs to us on the basis of an
    56        abuse of the process because the trial will clearly become
    57        unmanageable, and that is obviously the aim of the
    58        Plaintiffs.
    59
    60        I just want to say I think the Plaintiffs have also had a

Prev Next Index