Day 087 - 10 Feb 95 - Page 20


     
     1        argue it, I may have to look at authority about it.
     2
     3   MR. MORRIS:  Mr. Rampton has recognised -- this is in some ways
     4        an even more fundamental point -- Mr. Rampton has
     5        recognised that you cannot be prejudiced by seeing
     6        documents of this nature.  Really, at the end of the day,
     7        it is just a question of doing whatever is necessary to
     8        ensure the smooth running of the case so that we can look
     9        at documents that need to be looked at that cannot
    10        prejudice yourself or the court and just get on with it,
    11        really.  That is all we want to do.  We do not really know
    12        what the correct systems are.
    13
    14   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  You have to think about where that takes you,
    15        because it is not just a question of whether I am
    16        prejudiced in some way by it.  Put that completely on one
    17        side for the moment.  It is a question of when I come to
    18        reach a judgment on a topic such as food poisoning, what
    19        evidence that is admissible evidence do I have upon which
    20        I can make either any findings of fact or reach any opinion
    21        or judgment.
    22
    23   MR. MORRIS:  I understand that, but I do not know if now is the
    24        time to -- at the moment we are looking at -- there are a
    25        number of things really, but firstly we want to be able to
    26        refer to documents and to be able to put sentences or
    27        sections to witnesses and that is the first practical
    28        matter.
    29
    30        Secondly, obviously we would like to be able to rely on
    31        them as evidence, or we may wish to rely on them as
    32        evidence; and, thirdly, what weight is given to it is a
    33        matter for yourself at the end of the day.  But the problem
    34        is, as far as we can see it, from our point of view, it is
    35        a practical problem at the moment which is disrupting the
    36        smooth flow of cross-examination.  So, in some ways we need
    37        first of all to develop a practical approach -----
    38
    39   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  It has to be a legal one if a challenge is
    40        taken to it.  If all the parties agree on a functional
    41        approach, I am only too happy to fall in with it and, to
    42        some large extent, that has been done when we have been in
    43        areas of expert evidence like nutrition, because I do not
    44        think any court in this country has ever yet got to grips
    45        with the status, or otherwise, of expert scientific
    46        articles which arrive in journals.  It may be that that is
    47        because the courts have not wanted to because if they came
    48        to a strict legal ruling on it, case after case in our
    49        courts would grind to a halt; but where a point is actually
    50        raised, and you and Mr. Rampton do not agree on the course 
    51        which is to be followed, one has to rule according to the 
    52        law as one understands it.  Let us just see what you do. 
    53        You would serve or if Mr. Rampton said there was no need
    54        for the formality, you would say, "What is in the article
    55        which I am looking at is a statement by Dr. Mitchell Cohon
    56        ----
    57
    58   MR. MORRIS:  Yes.
    59
    60   MR. JUSTICE BELL: - "and we wish a Civil Evidence Act notice to

Prev Next Index