Day 175 - 18 Oct 95 - Page 14
1 everybody, every single witness in this case so far, has
2 expanded upon their statement, and the only time there has
3 been any problem with it is if somebody has brought up a
4 completely new issues that is not touched upon in the
5 statement.
6
7 I feel that ought to be the procedure that is followed
8 here, that this witness, in common with all the other
9 witnesses previously, should be allowed to expand on what
10 is in his statement, and that if Mr. Rampton has an
11 objection that something is a new issue, then he makes that
12 objection at the time the question is asked.
13
14 MR. JUSTICE BELL: We will see where we go on that. But you
15 surely must appreciate, for all the times I have said it,
16 that the difficulty with wanting to embark on new matters
17 (if they are new matters) when your witnesses come second,
18 is that it makes the litigation totally uncontrollable and,
19 I fear, endless, because new matters are introduced which
20 Mr. Rampton then has a very strong argument for saying:
21 "Oh, well, in that case, I do want to go and look if there
22 is some particular person who can deal with that allegation
23 now specifics have been given", and I have to seriously
24 consider that.
25
26 I am also concerned that you are raising dust where there
27 would be none. At the moment, you have a statement from a
28 witness which goes completely uncontroverted, so far as
29 Sutton is concerned, by any evidence by McDonald's. I am
30 concerned that -- it is no use just saying: "Oh, we want
31 the truth to come out", you have to look after your own
32 interest in the litigation. If evidence comes in which
33 says Mr. So-and-So did that, Mr. So-and-So did that, the
34 next thing you will be faced with is an application by
35 Mr. Rampton (which it might be very difficult for me to
36 refuse) to call Mr. So-and-So, and you have evidence
37 refuting Mr. Whittle's evidence which would not otherwise
38 be there. If you were legally represented and if you were
39 getting legal advice from an experienced litigator, that
40 would have been brought well home to you.
41
42 MS. STEEL: I think the point is, though, that we are not trying
43 to bring in new issues; it is a matter of just expansion of
44 what is said in his statement. I know that our witnesses
45 come second. However, it does, nonetheless, affect us when
46 the Plaintiffs bring up new matters that are not in their
47 statement, as they have done, because it does mean that we
48 have not prepared for cross-examination, that we cannot ask
49 our witnesses what they say about what the witness is now
50 saying in time for us to be able to cross-examine their
51 witness. It does have a disadvantage. OK, they may be
52 able ------
53
54 MR. JUSTICE BELL: It does give you an opportunity to make
55 enquiries and see whether one of your witnesses can give an
56 answer to that. In fact, Mr. Morris said a moment or two
57 ago that he wanted to ask the witness about something said
58 by McDonald's witnesses, or even to see if there is someone
59 who can help.
60
