Day 182 - 02 Nov 95 - Page 65
1 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes, but let us see what it is in practical
2 terms. Were Mr. Morris to call -- let us just take
3 Mr. Lamti as an example -- Mr. Lamti: So far, where he has
4 called a witness who has made a statement, he has not been
5 putting their statements in as Civil Evidence Act
6 statements; he has been asking them as part of their oral
7 evidence to aver the truth of the statement they made. If
8 he does that with Monsieur Lamti, then section 7 does not
9 apply.
10
11 MR. RAMPTON: No, of course it does not, because I have to
12 cross-examine him.
13
14 MR. JUSTICE BELL: What I am trying to get my mind round for my
15 own benefit, as well as the Defendants', is suppose
16 Mr. Morris says: "I am going to rely upon those statements
17 as Civil Evidence Act statements, I am not going to bring
18 them across to this country". He then, therefore, has the
19 statements read because he wants them read rather than just
20 put in. You either then, or a little later, say you want
21 to avail yourself of section 7. Mr. Morris sees whatever
22 evidence you call for the purpose of destroying or
23 supporting, let us say, Monsieur Lamti's evidence, subject
24 to the proviso which appears over the page ---
25
26 MR. RAMPTON: Yes, I cannot do that.
27
28 MR. JUSTICE BELL: -- or what evidence you adduce tending to
29 prove that, let us say, Mr. Lamti has made another
30 statement inconsistent with the Civil Evidence Act
31 statement.
32
33 MR. RAMPTON: That is right.
34
35 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Then Mr. Morris has to contemplate, does he
36 not, whether he says to me, in the light of that: "I want
37 to call Mr. Lamti".
38
39 MR. RAMPTON: He cannot. I think strictly he cannot.
40
41 MR. JUSTICE BELL: No, I thought you might say that, but I am
42 going through it at my own slow pace because you said,
43 I think misunderstanding what I was saying because of my
44 lack of clarity: "Oh, well, I could not object to him
45 doing that", and we were at cross-purposes.
46
47 MR. RAMPTON: Yes, I see.
48
49 MR. JUSTICE BELL: But what I do not like is the idea that
50 Mr. Morris, perhaps, encouraged more than once by me,
51 should say: "I want to rely upon the Civil Evidence Act
52 statement". We then have you put in something in under
53 section 7 which he does not know about at all at the
54 moment, but then finding himself in a position where
55 technically he cannot call Mr. Lamti even if he wants to.
56
57 MR. RAMPTON: Can I suggest, that is why I raised it now,
58 because it is a question of timing. I mean, if one is
59 going to be technical, unless there is something in the
60 rules which I have not looked at which contradicts what
