Day 171 - 11 Oct 95 - Page 31


     
     1        the information is completely useless.
     2
     3   MR. JUSTICE BELL: I am not going to shut my mind as to the
     4        possibility that one or both sides might say: "We would
     5        like your leave if we require it to call one or two extra
     6        witnesses, not because they will give you the whole
     7        picture, but we say they put the lie to the other side's
     8        case" -- whether it is you who wants to call them or
     9        Mr. Morris who wants to call them.
    10
    11   MR. RAMPTON:  I understand that, which is the reason why I made
    12        the concession in relation to the people named on
    13        Mr. Morris' piece of paper.  I agree about that; and it may
    14        be that is a legitimate purpose of discovery, that it would
    15        enable Mr. Morris to call a witness.  He has got past
    16        stage 1, which is to plead a particular in relation to a
    17        named person.
    18
    19   MR. JUSTICE BELL: It could be said that is not an extravagance
    20        in this case, because it is all relatively recent when
    21        people might remember and we have a chance of getting some
    22        documentation which might help.
    23
    24   MR. RAMPTON:  Relating to those named cases.  What I do
    25        vehemently resist is the idea that we should give to
    26        Mr. Morris and Ms. Steel a list of names which their own
    27        witness who worked at Bath for something like four or five
    28        years has not identified for them.  That contravenes --
    29        that does not meet the Court of Appeal's criteria for
    30        pleading.  The Court of Appeal did not change the rule that
    31        before you are entitled to discovery you must make a
    32        specific allegation on grounds which you reasonably believe
    33        you have -- to summarise it.
    34
    35        For the people that Mr. Logan has not been able to name,
    36        the Defendants do not get past the starting post, in our
    37        respectful submission; and we ought, therefore, to be
    38        permitted to blank out the names of the persons who have
    39        not been specified by Mr. Logan.
    40
    41        I had intended to blank out their hours as well, on the
    42        grounds tht there was nothing said about them; therefore,
    43        the hours they worked were irrelevant.  But a compromise
    44        which might appeal to your Lordship, which I am certainly
    45        willing to offer, is that I take the names out but leave
    46        the hours in, so that your Lordship can see the whole
    47        picture, as with the schedules, and the actual numbers of
    48        hours worked by every single employee throughout that month
    49        or those two months, as the case may be.
    50 
    51   MR. JUSTICE BELL: What troubles me at the moment is -- so that 
    52        you can answer back -- there is potential evidence that a 
    53        lot of people were subject to scheduling malpractices.  I
    54        am not saying for a moment that that will carry weight at
    55        the end of the day, but that is what Mr. Logan says, in
    56        effect.  Part of the answer to discovery in relation to
    57        that is, well, we cannot have vast discovery just on the
    58        basis it might support a broad allegation of that kind.
    59        Say it has been narrowed down and suppose I am
    60        contemplating (as obviously I am) discovery of

Prev Next Index