Day 148 - 05 Jul 95 - Page 06


     
     1        Farrer, who made a very, very brief statement two years
     2        ago, has now made a great long statement refuting our
     3        witnesses from her store which is Seven Sisters store.
     4        Tony Giardina has just made another great long
     5        supplementary statement, about 20 pages or something, which
     6        I was looking at last night for the first time and I have
     7        not really read it properly.  Mr. Atkinson, I believe, is a
     8        completely new witnesses.
     9
    10        These are witnesses that Mr. Rampton hopes to call before
    11        the break.  Almass Antena has just made a great long
    12        statement in response to Anne Tobin, I believe, and One
    13        Every Mile which she is responding to and Anne Tobin.  All
    14        our statements that they are responding to were disclosed
    15        at least a year and a half ago.
    16
    17        We have only just literally in the last seven days or so
    18        got a lot of new statements, including supplementaries also
    19        from Frank Stanton and Mark Davies who the Plaintiffs
    20        propose to call first, I believe.  So, effectively,
    21        I cannot think myself what other witnesses there are for
    22        McDonald's to call maybe after the break, but I think that
    23        it does put us at a disadvantage that all these
    24        supplementaries and additional witnesses have been served
    25        at the very last moment.  It has given us no time at all to
    26        contact our witnesses for their comments.  I do not know
    27        where that leaves us.
    28
    29   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I do not think it leads to any actual
    30        difficulty.  You must do your best to cross-examine them on
    31        the information you have.  It is quite clear from looking
    32        at your witnesses again, after seeing the extra additional
    33        statements which have been served, that we have what looks
    34        like an outright conflict of recollection, I will put it
    35        that way, between a witness whom you propose to call and
    36        have available to call and a witness who McDonald's propose
    37        to call.
    38
    39        No-one could justifiably criticise you if you failed to put
    40        to a McDonald's witness something which one of your
    41        witnesses then gives evidence on in the autumn if the
    42        reason for failing to put it is clearly that you have not
    43        had time to check with that witness since the supplemental
    44        statement is made.  But the other reason why I say this, I
    45        do not think you are going to suffer any harm from it.  I
    46        am as confident as I could possibly be that when these
    47        witnesses get into the witness box on both sides there
    48        will, yet again, be things said by them which I am not
    49        going to stop which do not appear in the statements.
    50 
    51        I am absolutely confident that your witnesses from time to 
    52        time will say things which are not in their statements. 
    53        I am absolutely confident that McDonald's witnesses from
    54        time to time will say things which are not in their
    55        statements.  If we try to have a water tight system to make
    56        sure that all parties have been able to consult their own
    57        witnesses on every allegation which is made, we would be
    58        having statements in reply, rejoinders to those
    59        rerejoinders to those and it would never end.
    60

Prev Next Index