BEIS0001151
BEIS0001151
From: Permanent Secretary[/O=EXCHANGELABS/OU=EXCHANGE
ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP
(FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=3109B3DC828545FFBF265AAB4
BEC9017-SECRETARY,]
Sent: Wed 20/03/2019 2:56:57 PM (UTC)
To: Chisholm Alex (Private Office)i
Ce: Permanent Secretaryf- ~~
Subject: FW: Official Sensitive: Post Office Litigation Update
Hi Alex,
Readout from POL Board meeting below — they approved seeking a recusal.
Just to confirm, Kelly has not yet arranged a call with anyone — Kelly’s Private Office have confirmed
she agrees not to be involved in the decision.
..But if she did want a call, it would be with Tim Parker. Kelly wants to speak to Tim as he was present
for the discussion, even though not taking part in the decision. But we have advised (and received
assurances from Jess that) that BEIS legal also join.
Cheers,
Ben
From: Cooper, Tom - UKGI <__
Sent: 20 March 2019 14:44
To: Tolhurst, Mpst (BEIS)
Cc: Aldred, Tom - UKGI
Clarke, Stephen - UKGI
Clark Spad, Mpst (BEIS) ¢
ermanent
Secretary: :
Gareth (BEIS)
Lambert, Lucie - UKGI <________.__ GRO
Watson, Craig (Advanced Manufacturing
(Advanced Manufacturing and Services) <i
io
Vandini, Cecilia
eckett, Richard (Finance &
Lambert, Gavin (Advanced Manufacturing and Services)
Subject: fficial Sensitive: Post Office Litigation Update
Apologies my note is missing the punchline. POL’s Board approved seeking the recusal which will be
lodged in Court tomorrow
Sent from my iPhone
On 20 Mar 2019, at 14:20, Cooper, Tom - UKGI
‘> wrote:
Recusal
I just attended the Board meeting of POL.
There was a full discussion of the issues.
Lord Grabiner gave strong advice in favour of seeking recusal which he described as the
only option available to the Company to seek redress for the unfairness in the first trial
and prevent further unfairness in the second trial. He was clear in his opinion that Post
Office isn’t receiving a fair trial even if they might (or might not) eventually be found to
be at fault.
The Board had a full discussion of the reputational consequences and concluded that
the risks could be managed. One of the key concerns with the Horizon trial is that the
judge might go beyond the joint evidence of the expert witnesses and conclude that the
system doesn’t work today, something that would be highly damaging for customer and
postmaster confidence. In that context a number of the directors felt that the recusal
application is necessary in order to try to protect the business today.
There are many operational consequences from last week's judgement that the
management team are focused on and will come back to the Board on Monday. So far
management have been relieved that the response, particularly from postmasters, has
been relatively light. Having said that it is still early days and they expect to get a better
picture in the next week or so when there is a monthly settlement date.
The Board now has independent legal support which is very welcome and something we
have been pushing for. I hope this will be a catalyst for mapping out a path to resolving
this case.
Tom
Sent from my iPhone
BEIS0001151
BEIS0001151