Day 262 - 13 Jun 96 - Page 60


     
     1        at quarter to four, by all means you carry on trying to
     2        make your arrangements.  I am quite prepared to sit a bit
     3        late, but I suggest Mr. Hall goes on without you, rather
     4        than risk him not finishing this evening.
     5
     6                          (Short Adjournment)
     7
     8   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Yes.
     9
    10   MR. HALL:  Your Lordship, I understand the Plaintiffs to be
    11        asserting privilege in relation to notes of seven people,
    12        some of whom are going to be witnesses, made at various
    13        meetings, and, following the making of those notes, reports
    14        or some of the reports that were drafted in connection with
    15        those meetings.
    16
    17        As I now understand it, it is accepted that, in relation to
    18        the reports that have been disclosed, there is no claim to
    19        privilege.
    20
    21   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I think the way it is put, they would have
    22        been privileged but, having made it clear that the witness
    23        was to be called rather than wait to deploy his evidence,
    24        it was convenient to waive the privilege in respect of
    25        their notes of the occasions in relation to which they were
    26        going to give evidence in advance, to avoid delay.
    27
    28   MR. HALL:  That was my original understanding.  Listening to
    29        Mr. Rampton, it appeared there was no claim to privilege in
    30        relation to the reports that have been disclosed.  If I am
    31        wrong on that -- I see him shaking his head -- then I will
    32        adjust my argument accordingly.
    33
    34   MR. RAMPTON:  If I gave that impression, it is not one
    35        I intended to give.  The whole material is
    36        prima facie  -----
    37
    38   MR. HALL:  Then I shall work on that basis.
    39
    40   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Yes.
    41
    42   MR. HALL:  Your Lordship, the first matter, in my respectful
    43        submission, which it would be appropriate for you to
    44        consider is whether or not there is a relationship that
    45        exists concerning which privilege could be claimed.  This
    46        is a point which is related to the dominant purpose, as
    47        will be seen, but is slightly different; and I will go on
    48        to dominant purpose as the second point.  But, in relation
    49        to this first point, I would invite your Lordship to look
    50        at the case of Jones v. Great Central Railway Company 
    51        [1910] A.C., 4. 
    52 
    53   MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes.
    54
    55   MR. HALL:  It is a fairly short report, and it concerns a member
    56        of a trade union who had been dismissed and who wrote
    57        documents for his union for them to decide whether or not
    58        to instruct solicitors.  It was held in that case that the
    59        letters containing the information did not fall within the
    60        established rule as to the privilege between solicitor and

Prev Next Index