Day 165 - 27 Sep 95 - Page 14
1 initially before the district registrar. He made an order
2 for discovery of (a) the custody records relating to all
3 persons arrested by two police officers in the vicinity of
4 the University of Manchester Students' Union on 1st March
5 1985." That part was not appealed against. Those notes
6 can only have been to either test the evidence of the
7 witness or to test their credibility. I would have said
8 that that was a parallel to other passages of the notes in
9 our case which have been blanked out.
10
11 On page 668, in the judgment of Dillon L.J., opposite
12 D -- I do not know whether you have that page?
13
14 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes.
15
16 MS. STEEL: It says: "Conversely, the Chief Constable concedes
17 that if there are certificates of conviction by criminal
18 courts within heading (1) they would be and should be
19 disclosed. Such certificates of conviction would directly
20 affect the issues in the action in that under section 11 of
21 the Civil Evidence Act 1968 they would be admissible in
22 evidence at the trial and the officers would be taken to
23 have committed the offences unless the contrary were to be
24 proved."
25
26 As far as I can see, whilst obviously that is a slightly
27 different circumstance, the only reason for allowing in
28 such records of criminal convictions would be evidence as
29 to credit and, therefore, it cannot be that all evidence
30 relating to credit is excluded automatically.
31
32 MR. RAMPTON: My Lord, I ought to intervene in case your
33 Lordship needs help. The point about that is that section
34 11 of the 1968 Act says that the certificate of conviction
35 is evidence that the conviction is correct subject to
36 rebuttal.
37
38 MS. STEEL: Yes, but the point is that is not relevant to the
39 particular issue in the action, apart from the purposes of
40 credit.
41
42 MR. RAMPTON: If one is going to say that, one needs to look at
43 letter C on the same page.
44
45 MS. STEEL: At the top of page 669 -- I have a spare copy.
46
47 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Do not worry. I have 669. It was just 667
48 which was not in my photocopy. I listened as you read it
49 out. I have it in my room anyway.
50
51 MS. STEEL: At the top it says -- I will read from the bottom of
52 previous page -- "There are, however, a number of relevant
53 limitations on the principles which I have mentioned.
54
55 The first is that the court should not order discovery, or
56 interrogatories which are a form of discovery, on matters
57 which would go solely to cross-examination as to credit.
58 I think that Walton J. was right" -----
59
60 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I have read that. Tell me the point you seek
