Day 148 - 05 Jul 95 - Page 31

     
     1
     2   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Yes.  Then I will give my ruling on all
     3        outstanding matters which have been argued.
     4
     5   MS. STEEL:  To be honest, I think some, I mean, say, the
     6        publication things and the counterclaim -- there is no
     7        particular urgency about that, but the problem is,
     8        particularly with employment documents, the later we get
     9        them, the fewer witnesses that we are going to be able to
    10        use them for the purposes of cross-examination.
    11
    12        So, as far as the other documents go, the Guatemala maps
    13        and things like that, I think it is fine if they are not
    14        sorted out, but I really do think the employment ones are
    15        particularly urgent.
    16
    17   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  That may be so, but the way I see things at
    18        the moment is probably this argument will run into tomorrow
    19        and I will give my ruling an all matters on Monday morning
    20        or something like that.
    21
    22   MS. STEEL:   We have page 53 of the day 145 now.
    23
    24   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Yes, I have put that in.  Do you want me to
    25        look at that again now?
    26
    27   MS. STEEL:  That explains which letter we are asking for.
    28
    29   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Yes, thank you.
    30
    31   MS. STEEL:   The letter is referred to at line 34 on that page,
    32        then Mr. Morris asks for a copy of it at line 54.
    33
    34   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Yes.
    35
    36   MR. MORRIS:  On the Guatemala thing, I might have made a
    37        miscalculation because Dr. Gomez Gonzales said he did not
    38        recollect a map in Guatemala, but he did seem to recollect
    39        he had seen a map in Costa Rica, which he said on day 68
    40        which was 16th December 1994 on page 34, line 23.  He was
         not sure; "I seem to recollect that I have seen it."
    42
    43        Then he talks about the Brazil map, so it is possible that
    44        the Plaintiffs have responded to the Costa Rica completely
    45        unequivocally, but we would certainly if in Costa Rica they
    46        do have a map of their suppliers, then we ought to get a
    47        copy of it.  If they do not have a map, then we can draw a
    48        conclusion on that.
    49
    50        I am going to next on to No. 6.  The whole area of the 
    51        Civil Evidence Act notices, in fact, really has been raised 
    52        a number of times in the proceedings.  It is not just as 
    53        written down there, something which was raised before,
    54        about at what level does someone become a representative of
    55        a Plaintiff for the purposes of a Civil Evidence Act
    56        notice, but also on the issue of once we have a Civil
    57        Evidence Act notice on evidence when it becomes evidence.
    58
    59        So if I can start with the first point which is what
    60        I would say, my opinion would be, a completely common sense