POL00023956
POL00023956
Message
From: Jane MacLeod t.
Sent: 10/04/2019 16:52:24
To: Andrew Parsons [/o=Exchange-Org/ou=Exchange Administrative Group
(FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/c ipi ad9ed344815e47e4aaa3c0e7e1740919-Andrew Pars]
ce: Rodric Williams {. I
Subject: RE: Recusal judgement [WBDUK-AC.FID26896945]
Wonderful — thank you (and very good news about Mia!)
Ce: Rodric Williams GRO H
Subject: FW: Recusal judgement [WBDUK-AC.FID26896945]
Jane
See below. LGQC is sticking with “strong” prospects of success.
Ps. I'm ok for the meeting with Al tomorrow.
A
Andrew Parsons
Partner
Wombie Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP.
Manage your e-alert preferences
. WOMBLE womblebonddickinson.com
' BOND
DICKINSON
From: Anthony Grabiner 4.
Sent: 10 April 2019 15:58
To: Andrew Parsons
Cc: David Cavender
dl >; Amy Prime David
Néill f
Subject: Re: Récusal judgement [WBDUK-AC.FID26896945]
Dear Andrew,
I haven’t downgraded anything. ‘Reasonable’ was not my word. I believe we have a strong case because the
POL-0020435
POL00023956
POL00023956
Judge decided more than he should have done or was necessary for him to decide at the Common Issues trial.
He was asked on many occasions both before and during the trial to take great care not to trespass into the
territory of the future cases and I believe that he wrongly failed to heed that request. Many of his observations
are expressed as firm conclusions rather than cautious preliminary expressions of current thinking and that point
was not seriously challenged by the other side in the recusal hearing. If he had case managed the litigation in a
more disciplined way all this could have been avoided.
The latest recusal judgment is an aggressively strong defense by the Judge of his personal position. This is not
surprising. He dug himself into it in the first place and he’s now in the business of digging himself out. The
collective view of the team - having observed him during the trial - was that this is what he would do and his
refusal to recuse himself coupled with his refusal to give leave to appeal against that judgment was predicted by
the team. As previously explained I also believe that in all the circumstances Post Office has no real alternative
choice but to pursue appeals to the Court of Appeal against both the recusal and the Common Issues judgments.
All that said, and as previously advised, I cannot give a guarantee of success in the Court of Appeal. There are
always risks associated with litigation. I think Lord Neuberger’s view on prospects should also be sought by the
clients.
Regards,
Tony
Lord Grabiner QC
One Essex Court,
Temple,
London, EC4Y 9AR.
Tony — do you have any comment on the question below? If you read up from the bottom of this short email
chain this should hopefully make sense.
Kind regards
Andy
Andrew Parsons
Partner
Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP
d:
POL-0020435
POL00023956
POL00023956
Manage your e-alert preferences<https://www.womblebonddickinson.com/uk/preferences>
<image181b8d.PNG><http://>
womblebonddickinson.com<https://www.womblebonddickinson.com>
<imagec0c780.PNG><https://www.twitter.com/wbd_uk>
<image003136.PNG><https://www.linkedin.com/company/womble-bond-dickinson-uk-IIp/>
From: Jane MacLeod {
Sent: 10 April 2019 13:00
To: Andrew Parsons <~ — ~~ H
Ce: Rodric Williams <.... GRO . ual
Subject: RE: Recusal judgement [WBDUK-AC.F1D26896945]
Hi Andy
Sorry to be petty - LGQC told me when I met him (feels like ages ago) that we had ‘strong grounds’ to bring
the application for recusal. When I challenged him on what our prospects of success were, he said (not an exact
quote ....) he wouldn’t say ‘strong grounds to bring the application’, unless there were strong prospects of
SUCCESS .....
That now seems to be down graded to ‘reasonable’ ...... If that is deliberate then I need to be able to explain to
the Board why.
Jane
Jane MacLeod I
From: Andrew Parsons
Sent: 10 April 2019 11:23
To: Jane MacLeod <_
Ce: Rodric Williams: GRO
Subject: RE: Recusal judgement [WBDUK-ACFID26896945] ~~
Jane
Counsel's view on the prospects of success on appeal has not materially changed following the recusal
judgment. They continue to believe the appeal has a reasonable prospect of success. If anything, Fraser has said
a few things in the judgment that may even help demonstrate apparent bias.
Kind regards
Andy
Andrew Parsons
Partner
Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP
POL-0020435
POL00023956
POL00023956
Manage your e-alert preferences<https://www.womblebonddickinson.com/uk/preferences>
<image001.png><http://>
womblebonddickinson.com<https://www.womblebonddickinson.com>
<image002.png><https://www.twitter.com/wbd_uk>
<image003.png><https://www.linkedin.com/company/womble-bond-dickinson-uk-Ip/>
From: Jane MacLeod <j GRO. >
Sent: 10 April 2019 0
To: Andrew Parsons <
Ce: Rodric Williams +
Subject: Recusal judgement
Andy
Now that the Counsel team have had a chance to review yesterday’s judgment, is there anything in that which
changes their view of the prospects on appeal? I have been specifically asked this by the Board so an early
answer would be helpful!
Thanks
Jane
Jane MacLeod
Group Director Legal, Risk & Governance
Post Office
2A I FCF RR RF AI 0 2 0 0 RS 0 RBA 0 0 OR 0 OR CSG
This email and any attachments are confidential and intended for the addressee only. If you are not the named
POL-0020435
POL00023956
POL00023956
recipient, you must not use, disclose, reproduce, copy or distribute the contents of this communication. If you
have received this in error, please contact the sender by reply email and then delete this email from your system.
Any views or opinions expressed within this email are solely those of the sender, unless otherwise specifically
stated.
POST OFFICE LIMITED is registered in England and Wales no 2154540. Registered Office: Finsbury Dials,
20 Finsbury Street, London EC2Y 9AQ.
HI 4 28 28 ff fk 28 4K 8 R28 a AK 8 2 a ak 8 oR a
“Post Office Limited is committed to protecting your privacy. Information about how we do this can be found
on our website at www.postoffice.co.uk/privacy<http://www.postoffice.co.uk/privacy>”
Please consider the environment! Do you need to print this email?
The information in this e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may be legally privileged and protected
by law. jane.macleo + only is authorised to access
this e-mail
jane.macleod
_.jplease notify andrew.parso
s soon as possible and delete any copies. Unauthorised
dissemination, distribution, publication or copying of this communication or attachments is prohibited and may
be unlawful. Information about how we use personal data is in our Privacy
Policy<https://www.womblebonddickinson.com/uk/privacy-policy> on our website.
Any files attached to this e-mail will have been checked by us with virus detection software before
transmission. Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP accepts no liability for any loss or damage which may be
caused by software viruses and you should carry out your own virus checks before opening any attachment.
Content of this email which does not relate to the official business of Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP, is
neither given nor endorsed by it.
This email is sent by Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP which is a limited liability partnership registered in
England and Wales under number OC317661. Our registered office is 4 More London Riverside, London, SE1
2AU, where a list of members' names is open to inspection. We use the term partner to refer to a member of the
LLP, or an employee or consultant who is of equivalent standing. Our VAT registration number is
GB123393627.
Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP is a member of Womble Bond Dickinson (International) Limited, which
consists of independent and autonomous law firms providing services in the US, the UK, and elsewhere around
the world. Each Womble Bond Dickinson entity is a separate legal entity and is not responsible for the acts or
omissions of, nor can bind or obligate, another Womble Bond Dickinson entity. Womble Bond Dickinson
(International) Limited does not practice law. Please see
www.womblebonddickinson.com/legal<http://www.womblebonddickinson.com/legal> notices for further
details.
Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
POL-0020435
POL00023956
POL00023956
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
POL-0020435