Day 165 - 27 Sep 95 - Page 26
1 very quick thing: On the question of the Operations Manual
2 which was dealt with yesterday and you have to rule about
3 what is happening about that, can we just point you to Ord.
4 24 r. 12 where it says that you have the power to order any
5 document to be brought to court and to decide what to do
6 with those documents once they have been brought to court.
7 Shall I read it out?
8
9 MR. JUSTICE BELL: No. I read it this morning. I am just
10 reminding myself of the general structure of Ord. 24.
11
12 MR. MORRIS: Right. That, of course, could also apply to any
13 blanked out documents.
14
15 There was the matter that was raised -- I do not know if
16 there has been a ruling on it, well, there has not been a
17 ruling on it, but whether you intend to rule on it or what
18 you want to happen about it -- we have said that the
19 Plaintiffs have included a privileged document in their
20 counterclaim file. If you remember, it was the document
21 which we had, it was a letter that we sent to a potential
22 witness with handwriting on it which somehow has become,
23 according to the Plaintiffs, evidence of our circulation of
24 same or similar matters to justify their defence to
25 counterclaim. But it is a clearly privileged document.
26 The Plaintiffs said something -- I cannot remember but
27 Mr. Rampton did respond somehow saying -----
28
29 MR. RAMPTON: My response was that I do not understand why he
30 said that it is privileged. It does not, on the face of
31 it, appear to be anything of the kind.
32
33 MR. JUSTICE BELL: My recollection (which may be unsound) was
34 that you raised it before, or Ms. Steel did, and
35 Mr. Rampton said that it was not privileged. The matter
36 then went over for you to make an application for its
37 return once you were prepared to do so, if you chose to do
38 so.
39
40 MS. STEEL: I actually think that we brought it -----
41
42 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Do you remember, we had some argument before
43 about documents which might be privileged and whether they
44 were disclosed in error, and there is some law on it? As
45 I understood it, the issues between you and Ms. Steel on
46 the one side and McDonald's on the other is, first of all,
47 whether any privilege attached to it and, secondly, whether
48 the way in which it had got into McDonald's hands meant
49 that that had been waived or gone by the board in some
50 way. There is some law on that. Do you remember, we had
51 an argument in relation to the letters where eventually
52 Mr. Rampton said it was more trouble than it was worth and
53 did not pursue the matter?
54
55 MS. STEEL: As I recall, the last time it was brought up, the
56 Plaintiffs said that they would look into how it came into
57 their possession and what they had to say about it being
58 privileged. I do not think we ever got a reply on that.
59
60 MR. RAMPTON: It is not up to me to make a case that it is not
