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

Prev Next Index