Day 136 - 16 Jun 95 - Page 20
1
2 Q. -- it has a stamp 12th July 1989, and the plan itself was
3 drawn in December 1987?
4 A. That is correct.
5
6 MR. MORRIS: The last amendment E has not got an
7 actual -- I cannot read it.
8 A. It says "non-slip tiles added".
9
10 Q. Yes, but the date says 22.9 ---
11
12 MR. JUSTICE BELL: But has it something ------
13
14 MR. MORRIS: -- something. Does anybody know?
15
16 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Is it a "9", can you tell or not? The one
17 above is 88.
18 A. I would say it is a "9", sir.
19
20 MR. MORRIS: So, what is that, 22.9.89?
21 A. 89, yes.
22
23 Q. So just to clarify that, that date, E, is 22.9.89, is it?
24 A. Yes, that is what I am reading.
25
26 MS. STEEL: Just to clarify, you are not saying it is 1989, from
27 your own knowledge; you are saying that from what you think
28 you can read on there?
29 A. From what I can see, from what I can see.
30
31 MR. MORRIS: You can see it, OK, because we cannot read that at
32 all. Behind the front counter there is no non-slip tiling
33 on this plan, is there?
34 A. No, there is not.
35
36 Q. Certainly, in the dining area there is not any non-slip
37 tiling?
38 A. No, there is not.
39
40 Q. I think we can leave the map. So, when you from 1988
41 onwards in your evidence said that tiles were used which
42 were two-sided, one area had a non-slip side and one area
43 did not, and you could use them whichever way up was the
44 most suitable, yes?
45 A. No, not the most suitable -- where it was necessary to
46 have the non-slip ---
47
48 Q. Where it was designated?
49 A. -- properties, yes.
50
51 Q. So the Company made a conscious decision not to use the
52 non-slip or, sorry, the slip resistant side except in the
53 areas which it was designated as next to hot surfaces?
54 A. Yes.
55
56 Q. Yes.
57 A. But I must stress, prior to 88. I joined the Company
58 in 1980, and we have always had non-slip floor tiles in the
59 designated kitchen areas.
60
