Day 072 - 12 Jan 95 - Page 68


     
     1        quite accurately say:  "Well, I had no choice in the
     2        matter".
     3
     4   MS. STEEL:  The thing about them being hostile, if the
     5        Plaintiffs decide not to call one of their witnesses and we
     6        subpoenaed them, would that mean we cannot cross-examine
     7        them?
     8
     9   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Yes.  If you call a witness you can only ask
    10        them questions which you could ask a perfectly willing
    11        witness; you cannot start cross-examining them.  There are
    12        different provisions which can arise in certain cases in
    13        the criminal courts with regard to that, but they do not
    14        help you and they do not often help in a criminal court
    15        because if a witness is hostile and the person who calls
    16        the witness is entitled to treat them as hostile and cross
    17        examines them, it normally ends up that their evidence is
    18        not worth anything one way or the other.  So, if you do
    19        call someone you are dependent upon their co-operation once
    20        they are compelled to get in the witness box or, if not
    21        their co-operation, at least their willingness to give an
    22        honest answer to your questions.
    23
    24   MS. STEEL:  Going back to ----
    25
    26   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  If you have a particular problem in the
    27        future with a particular witness, then do not hesitate to
    28        raise it.  I would suggest, though it is entirely a matter
    29        for you, that it would not be right to say:  "Well, I have
    30        to think about the interest of the witness because I do not
    31        want to do anything which might even cause them some harm
    32        in the future".  Because, after all, if someone has
    33        volunteered the step of getting in contact with you and
    34        saying they can say this, that or the other, they have
    35        taken the responsibility for saying that in the first
    36        place.  What happens or does not happen to them thereafter,
    37        if you call them, really is not your responsibility.
    38
    39   MR. MORRIS:  But if McDonald's interfered in any way or
    40        pressurised that person before, during or after because
    41        they have given evidence, I would thought that would have
    42        been contempt.
    43
    44   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  If they put pressure on them beforehand, they
    45        would be in a very difficult situation.  It would be less
    46        clear afterwards.  It would very much depend upon the
    47        particular facts.  But my recollection is, for instance,
    48        that people have been held to be in contempt of court where
    49        they have tried to persuade a witness who is, for instance,
    50        an employee not to go and give evidence because they want 
    51        them to be at work that day.  The courts have -- my 
    52        recollection, Mr. Rampton -- on occasions taken a very 
    53        tough attitude towards that sort of situation.
    54
    55   MR. RAMPTON:  My Lord, certainly.  It is plainly contempt of
    56        court to refuse to pay someone because they have, for
    57        example, been called as a witness or for jury service, that
    58        is quite clear, or to make a threat to do so.  I do not
    59        know if Ms. Steel or Mr. Morris have finished, but when
    60        they have there is something quite important that I wish to

Prev Next Index