Day 216 - 06 02 96 - Page 23

 
 

                                                                  DAY 216
 
 
 
 
 
     1        I am not going to call Miss Benson either.
     2
     3        My Lord, the definite recalls are Mr. Preston and
     4        Mr. Fairgrieve; and I want to say something more about
     5        Mr. Preston in a moment, if I may.
     6
     7        My Lord, that concludes the list of "definites" so far as
     8        the Plaintiffs are concerned.  There are some "possibles".
     9        First of all, in relation to employment, there are some
    10        loose ends, in the sense of documents which your Lordship
    11        has expressed mystification -- perhaps that is too strong a
    12        words but, anyway, curiosity -- about the meaning of.  I do
    13        not know quite at the moment how it is best explained,
    14        whether it is through a witness or simply me to tell
    15        your Lordship what I think they mean.  An example was the
    16        Heathrow payroll summary sheets, proposed changes during
    17        the periods.
    18
    19   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Yes.
    20
    21   MR. RAMPTON:  Another possibility, my Lord, where further
    22        evidence -- my heart sinks as I say it -- might be required
    23        and we would have to apply to your Lordship for leave, is
    24        in relation to various entirely new allegations made by
    25        Mr. Logan from Bath when he was in the witness box.  But we
    26        are looking at that now.  We are seeing whether we can
    27        avoid that and simply deal with it by way of
    28        cross-examination when he comes back.  I would be very keen
    29        to avoid that if I possibly can.
    30
    31        My Lord, nutrition; the possibility of somebody to deal
    32        with your Lordship's meaning face to face, of course that
    33        must be in abeyance until we know whether the Defendants
    34        are going to appeal against your Lordship's finding,
    35        because, if they are, then there is no point in our putting
    36        somebody forward to deal with it, lest the appeal should
    37        succeed.  I think the time runs out this week some time.
    38        We will not put anybody forward until we know what the
    39        position is.
    40
    41        Then, my Lord, another "possible" (although very faintly
    42        possible, in my view) is residues.  I say faintly possible
    43        because, on my reading of it, the case which Dr. North
    44        offers in relation to residues is a faint case.  If we did
    45        decide to respond to that, it would be Professor Walker or
    46        somebody like him.  That, then, would be the totality of
    47        our evidence.
    48
    49        I do desire to say a word about Mr. Preston; and the reason
    50        is this:  your Lordship will remember that he gave evidence 
    51        on 30th June, 1st, 4th and 5th July 1994, the beginning of 
    52        the case. 
    53
    54   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Yes.
    55
    56   MR. RAMPTON:  After he had finished that part of his evidence,
    57        the Defendants served a reply to the Defence to
    58        Counterclaim alleging malice against the Second
    59        Plaintiffs.  In summary, the case which they -- I cannot
    60        remember the exact date, but it was long after Mr. Preston
 
                                      23