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
