Day 311 - 06 Dec 96 - Page 28
1
2 MS. STEEL: Can I ask a question about section 4, because I do
3 not actually remember a section 4 notice being served?
4
5 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I have a copy of it, I put it behind. It
6 refers to a clerical assistant or a typist in the agency.
7 I put mine behind. It was 8th August.
8
9 MS. STEEL: Was that the one I wrote objecting to?
10
11 MR. JUSTICE BELL: There were a number and that was one of them.
12
13 MR. RAMPTON: It was the first, number one of the letter of 8th
14 August.
15
16 MS. STEEL: Effectively serving a counter notice?
17
18 MR. RAMPTON: It would not be a counter notice. They have
19 already given their evidence.
20
21 MS. STEEL: I have not got the letter in front of me so I do
22 not know if it is the one I got in mind, but when
23 I received the letter in August, which was when I got back,
24 I did object to it.
25
26 MR. RAMPTON: Ms. Steel wrote back and said she objected to it
27 on the basis that it might not be an attempt by us to
28 introduce evidence which had not been deposed to by the
29 witnesses, but that is an objection in law.
30
31 MR. JUSTICE BELL: That really brings me to the next thing,
32 because there were also Civil Evidence Act notices in
33 relation to the notes, I believe -- it may have been the
34 statements, but I think it was the notes -- of the inquiry
35 agents who had been called.
36
37 MR. RAMPTON: Yes, that was belt and braces and we believe that
38 we have the common law right in our written submissions so
39 far as that is concerned. Section 32, I think it is, which
40 makes admissible as evidence of their truth the contents of
41 notes cross-examined on beyond the examination-in-chief
42 operates independently of a section 2 notice, and we only
43 served the section 2 notices as a 'just in case', in case
44 your Lordship did not see the effect of the authorities in
45 the same way as we did.
46
47 MR. JUSTICE BELL: The only thing which troubles me about that,
48 on the authorities you have referred to it seems to me that
49 the moment either Ms. Steel or Mr. Morris ask any evidence
50 of the inquiry agents about a matter in their notes which
51 was not a matter which they referred to in-chief the whole
52 of the notes became admissible in evidence, and that is the
53 effect of cases like Gregory. What troubles me about that
54 is, well, so be it, but what, if any, weight is it fair to
55 attach to them if it was unclear, certainly to the
56 Defendants and I happily confess to me, that that is what
57 was happening at the time.
58
59 MR. RAMPTON: I will say this, I had an inkling of it. I do not
60 think my learned junior would even have that, I am bound to
