Day 087 - 10 Feb 95 - Page 14
1
2 MR. MORRIS: If that could be clarified?
3
4 MR. JUSTICE BELL: As I understand it, just sit down for a
5 moment and let me just read section 4 again. As
6 I understand it, and Mr. Rampton will correct me or,
7 rather, address me if he disagrees with what I say, because
8 of the hearsay rule, a witness is not allowed to say what
9 someone else told him as evidence of the truth of what that
10 someone else told him. He can say it as evidence of the
11 fact that he was told, but we are not concerned with that
12 gloss here.
13
14 Section 4 makes an exception in relation to things which a
15 person has been told, collecting information under a duty
16 on him to do so. It makes the provision which is,
17 therefore, needed so far as documents are concerned. If
18 you had followed all the Civil Evidence Act procedures with
19 regard to a statement made in a document, for instance, a
20 report, the maker of which said: "When I went to such and
21 such premises I observed this happening", if you followed
22 all the Civil Evidence Act provisions and the provisions of
23 the rules, that statement could become admissible in
24 evidence.
25
26 If the statement said: "When I went to such and such
27 premises I was told by a Mr. X that he had seen this
28 happening", you could follow the Civil Evidence Act
29 procedures and those set down in the rules until the cows
30 come home; it would still be a hearsay statement and,
31 therefore, not admissible in evidence.
32
33 If it is a situation in section 4 where what is set out in
34 section 4 is complied with, that may well not be so. One
35 would have to look at the exact circumstances and deal with
36 it. But I think for the purposes of the documents you are
37 concerned with at the moment -- we will bear in mind
38 section 4 -- we can probably put section 4 on one side.
39
40 What I thought you had been suggesting from time to time
41 and it was confirmed by your reference to the rule about
42 authentic documents, that if a document is authentic (and
43 no-one, for instance, has suggested that PHLS report is not
44 an authentic report made as it appears to be made), if a
45 report or any other document is official in the sense that
46 it is published by an arm of government, one does not have
47 to observe the Civil Evidence Act provisions or the
48 provisions of the rules. It is free-standing as admissible
49 evidence in its own right. That is what I was saying is
50 news to me.
51
52 MR. MORRIS: There are two things: There is something which is,
53 is a document evidence and, secondly, is a document
54 admissible as a fact that it exists? Obviously, it can be
55 challenged, disputed, and obviously by putting a Civil
56 Evidence Act Notice it becomes evidence.
57
58 MR. JUSTICE BELL: That is where you have lost me, you see.
59 What you are doing by saying: "I put a Civil Evidence Act
60 Notice on that document" -- that is why I tried to pick the
