Day 149 - 06 Jul 95 - Page 21
1 and their applications themselves, to which I now respond.
2
3 My Lord, the first application was, I think, the
4 Defendants' application; therefore, I will now respond to
5 it. It was, in effect, this, that because on two occasions
6 the Defendants had found that there was more in the witness
7 statements that had been served on them than there was in
8 the ones in the trial bundles, the Plaintiffs should pay
9 for an independent person to compare all the trial
10 witnesses statements, those are ones in the bundle, with
11 what the Defendants have got.
12
13 My Lord, the Plaintiffs have so far called 39 witnesses.
14 There have been two cases of error in this regard, both in
15 favour of the Defendants, in the sense that they got more
16 information than they would otherwise have done.
17 I calculate that there are about 18 new Plaintiffs'
18 witnesses left, only five of these due to be called before
19 the long vacation.
20
21 My Lord, therefore, as your Lordship suggested to the
22 Defendants in argument, the right approach for them, if
23 they are concerned about it, is to have a quick look at
24 what they have, if they want to, to compare it with what is
25 in the witness statement of the witness who is coming up.
26 That is all I say about that.
27
28 My Lord, the next one is the amendment about residues and
29 the recall of Mr. North. Again, this is a response by me
30 to their application. I am not sure it is yet an
31 application. All I would say about that is that I will not
32 do anything until I see his additional paper, which
33 your Lordship may remember, which, in fact, he suggested to
34 me outside court he should provide; and I reported that to
35 the Defendants and to your Lordship. That is both in
36 relation to residues and in relation to any comments he
37 might have about McDonald's procedures arising out of a
38 study of the PHLS report into Preston.
39
40 My Lord, then we come to -----
41
42 MR. JUSTICE BELL: What about the two articles which
43 Dr. Gomez Gonzales relied on, I think, and said he
44 produced, because is not the situation rather different
45 there? He has relied upon some article to which he has
46 then made reference.
47
48 MR. RAMPTON: He relied upon them because he was cross-examined
49 about them on an issue which does not yet exist in the
50 case. It is in the pamphlet, but it is not in the Defence.
51 It will be in the Defence if and when Mr. North produces
52 something which can be relied upon. It is not for
53 Mr. Gomez Gonzalez, out of the kindness of his heart, to
54 try and please the Defendants by offering materials which
55 are irrelevant to any issue in the case. If the time
56 should come when they are relevant, why then, no doubt they
57 can be searched for. It is not the first time it has
58 arisen, as your Lordship knows very well.
59
60 My Lord, the next matter is a matter of law. It is, in
