Day 199 - 11 Dec 95 - Page 23


     
     1   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  You see, the point arises in relation to the
     2        witness you have already called.  It has more general
     3        importance, but I only actually have to rule on it at the
     4        moment in relation to the witness who has been called.  You
     5        say that just about everything which might be excluded, if
     6        Mr. Rampton's argument was correct, you hope to adduce
     7        under the provisions of the Civil Evidence Act, if
     8        I understand it?
     9
    10   MR. MORRIS:  Yes, we served a notice.
    11
    12   MS. STEEL:   I suppose, in theory, we could read them out if
    13        that was helpful?
    14
    15   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I do not know what the Plaintiffs' position
    16        is on that yet.
    17
    18   MR. RAMPTON:  I do not either.  I am certainly not willing to
    19        accept at the moment that would be a right thing to do.
    20
    21   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  There is a difficulty about the Defendants'
    22        argument on admissions; it may be partly a matter of form,
    23        but it is not entirely that.  I am not sure what my
    24        entitlement is to start giving what are, in fact,
    25        declaratory rulings on what I will consider inadmissible as
    26        an admission by or on behalf of the First or Second
    27        Plaintiff.  Obviously, if I have to rule on whether a
    28        statement made by an Assistant Manager or a Store Manager
    29        is to be taken as a statement by or on behalf of the First
    30        or Second Plaintiff, in a particular instance, I have to
    31        set out the principle which I apply before applying it to
    32        the particular evidence.
    33
    34        I want to hang it on some particular issue in relation to
    35        the evidence, rather than a generality, if I can.
    36
    37   MR. RAMPTON:  I think, my Lord, if I may respectively say so,
    38        that must be right.  Each of these questions has to be
    39        decided on a case by case basis because each depends on its
    40        own facts.
    41
    42   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I mean, the first time I come to rule on it,
    43        I set out the principle, I then make a ruling in relation
    44        to the particular issue which has arisen there.  If and
    45        when an issue arises with a future witness, the principle
    46        does not change; it is applied to the issue which has then
    47        newly arisen.  But what I do not want to do is just give a
    48        ruling on the principle without any application.  I cannot
    49        give a ruling in relation to Miss Lamb until I know what is
    50        outstanding in her evidence.  I cannot do that until I know 
    51        to what extent what people are said to have said to her is 
    52        admissible under the Civil Evidence Act.  So I do not need 
    53        to see whether it is an admission made for and on behalf of
    54        McDonald's.
    55
    56   MR. RAMPTON:  I would ----
    57
    58   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  What is the right way through it,
    59        Mr. Rampton?
    60

Prev Next Index