Day 205 - 17 Jan 96 - Page 37
1
2 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Let us come back to that on Monday morning,
3 because I would like to decide then -- and it is not going
4 to take very long-- whether I am allowed to have that
5 statement read as part of the evidence and, if not, whether
6 I am going to grant leave for the recall of Mr. Alimi or
7 not.
8
9 MR. MORRIS: I did not realise that Mr. Rampton's position was
10 that the best practice was that we should ask permission
11 for a Civil Evidence Act notice to be agreed, because of
12 course they have also served a number of Civil Evidence Act
13 notices in the last month and no leave has been asked for
14 those. So I just assumed that we had the right to put the
15 Civil Evidence Act notices.
16
17 MR. JUSTICE BELL: At a stage just before Christmas, I said that
18 from now on I want any party to ask leave to adduce the
19 evidence of further witnesses, which would include new
20 evidence from witnesses who have already been called.
21 I have been given a lot of statements since then, which
22 I have put in the bundles where I have asked it to be put.
23 But any party who wants to rely on any of those statements
24 must raise the matter with me, so that I can deal with the
25 question of whether they should become part of the evidence
26 of the case or not.
27
28 The purpose in saying what I did say before Christmas was
29 that I did not want any party to accept any longer that
30 they can just extend the length of the case by bringing in
31 new evidence. There may be no problem about witnesses, but
32 we have to deal with the question.
33
34 MR. MORRIS: Right.
35
36 MS. STEEL: I do not know whether the Plaintiffs could give some
37 indication of when they are intending to bring this up;
38 otherwise we do not know which ones they are going to apply
39 for; and, also, it is just likely to get forgotten. They
40 have served a vast number of statements over the past few
41 weeks.
42
43 MR. RAMPTON: I am not sure I understand that. I have served
44 some Civil Evidence Act notice statements. I think
45 I expressed myself, my Lord, badly when I first intervened
46 on this question. Nothing on Earth can prevent people from
47 serving statements with a Civil Evidence Act notice
48 attached to them. What prevents the evidence being called
49 -- as I think I did say -- was if the judge should take
50 the view that the notice being out of time (as all these
51 are) that in all the circumstances it would not be right to
52 adduce the evidence, which is the way your Lordship put it
53 -- which is, with respect, the correct way of putting it.
54 If and in so far as any of what Ms. Steel erroneously calls
55 the vast number of statements we have served recently are
56 objected to as evidence, why then, the Defendants should
57 say so. I propose to do the same with the bundle that
58 I have been handed this morning. If and in so far I object
59 to them, I shall say so. I am not in the least willing to
60 give Ms. Steel any indication at the moment of when I shall
