Day 164 - 26 Sep 95 - Page 23


     
     1        matter such as that.
     2
     3        I believe that when I made this application Mr. Rampton
     4        agreed that it was something that might be relevant and
     5        that they would look into it and see whether it was in
     6        their possession.  Therefore, a specific order was not
     7        made, but it was directed that they should look into what
     8        it was and making available a copy.
     9
    10        In their letter of 7th August the Plaintiffs have said that
    11        they have been informed that, "the program is now only kept
    12        on computer and no more copies in documentary form are
    13        retained at Head Office.  A search is being made at our
    14        client's restaurants to see if, by chance, a copy has been
    15        retained; if it has, it will be disclosed."  So, plainly,
    16        the Plaintiffs are accepting that it is a disclosable
    17        document.
    18
    19   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Do you have any idea from any source of
    20        information just what you think what formed the hard copy,
    21        if it were printed out, what it would take, how long it is
    22        and what it contains?
    23
    24   MR. RAMPTON:  I do.  My Lord, can I help?
    25
    26   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Shall I hear Mr. Rampton?
    27
    28   MS. STEEL:  Yes.
    29
    30   MR. RAMPTON:  I think I know what the position is.  What used to
    31        be called the management and crew scheduling programme is,
    32        as Mrs. Brinley-Codd wrote on 7th August, now I think a
    33        computer program.  The product of the use of that program,
    34        the program being a computer program, is a database stored
    35        on the computer which contains the actual schedules for
    36        every restaurant in the country for the current and the
    37        preceding week.  To print that out for the purposes of this
    38        case would, we respectfully submit, be a wholly unnecessary
    39        waste of time and money.  It would take days and it would
    40        be as high as a mountain, I dare say.
    41
    42        What I think that there is, because I think I have seen it,
    43        is a document which may not have quite the same name as the
    44        document that Ms. Steel applied for, but which does -- it
    45        is quite a short document -- I think, having glanced at it,
    46        tell people how to go about scheduling.  That, I think, is
    47        a written document.
    48
    49        If I am right about that (and I have only glanced at it),
    50        then I agree that is something the Defendants should 
    51        certainly have.  Unfortunately, I have not got it here. 
    52        Mrs. Brinley-Codd has it and she is not in London today. 
    53        But as soon as I have verified the accuracy, if it be
    54        accurate, of what I have just told your Lordship, then we
    55        will disclose it.  I agree in principle the way in which
    56        the Plaintiffs approached the questioning of scheduling is
    57        a relevant issue in this case.
    58
    59   MS. STEEL:   Obviously ----
    60

Prev Next Index