Day 263 - 14 Jun 96 - Page 25
1 to rely upon other transactions as evidence of
2 similar facts."
3
4 He then goes on about cross-examination as to credit.
5 Then:
6
7 "In those circumstances it is extravagant to
8 contend that evidence of other transactions
9 (presumably involving other companies and other
10 firms of accountants) would be admissible."
11
12 Obviously, we have not disavowed our intention to rely on
13 the rest of what would be in the notes, which obviously is
14 about the nature of the group. So that would not apply in
15 this case, either -- and obviously related to the consent
16 of the agents. I think that is basically it, actually.
17
18 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes.
19
20 MS. STEEL: If I could just check my notes for a second?
21 (Pause) Just one other thing that was said about the
22 notes of after 1990. I do not know whether this would be a
23 point or not, but I thought I ought to raise it, which is
24 that Mr. Rampton said that they would not be relevant to
25 any question arising in this action, but it just crossed my
26 mind that, bearing in mind that Mr. Nicholson has actually
27 given evidence that he did not know of the other inquiry
28 agents or that there were any female inquiry agents or that
29 it continued beyond 1991 -- sorry -- beyond January 1991,
30 I do not know, are they relevant to that question about
31 whether or not the evidence that Mr. Nicholson has given is
32 actually accurate?
33
34 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Well -----
35
36 MS. STEEL: I do not know. I thought I ought to raise that.
37
38 MR. JUSTICE BELL: You mean in relation to credibility? (Pause)
39 The difficulty is the problems over adducing evidence to
40 refute what someone said in relation to credibility, and if
41 they were discoverable, it would be the question of you
42 calling some evidence to that effect; so you would, in
43 effect, be doing that which, essentially, you are not
44 allowed to do, which is call evidence to discredit what
45 someone has just said. Do you remember, we had some
46 authority about that before?
47
48 MS. STEEL: Yes. The only thing -- I do not know -- it just
49 seemed it would be a bit different, bearing in mind that it
50 is relevant to the issue of consent and the extent of
51 involvement in the group; and that was the reason why we
52 were asking Mr. Nicholson about this.
53
54 MR. JUSTICE BELL: You are back to whether it is relevant to
55 those matters.
56
57 MS. STEEL: OK. All right. I am virtually finished checking
58 through my notes. I think that is it. Thank you.
59
60 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes.
