POL00043147
POL00043147
Message neces
—
From: Andrew Parsons GRO
Sent: 18/10/2019 19:98:28 sone .
To: Rodric Williams GRO : Emanuel, Catherine I GRO j Lerner, Alex
Subject: REL doctiments [WBDUK-AC.FID26896945]
Attachments: KEL Disclosure Actions Table - Update 18.10.19 (002).docx
Rod, Kate
Bullets for comment. Below is a possible email to Ben from Rod. Attached is an updated board report.
I have emailed Tony about getting him to confirm a delivery time for his bit.
A
Ben
Please find attached the updated board report addressing your points. They key points to note are:
1. WBD are assessing the risk over the weekend of the 93 high-risk KELs. By [cob on Wednesday] next week
Counsel will have reviewed those KELs in detail and given a view on whether they are likely to cause the Horizon
trial to be recommenced / the judgment delayed.
2. In relation of the c14,000 other KELs (ie. those not used at the trial), the key risk of reviewing the 14,000 KELs is
that the Claimants have not asked for the documents yet. If we review them now, PO will be required to disclose
any adverse documents uncovered. This is doing the Claimants’ work for them and may highlight new bugs in
Horizon that the Cs had previously decided not to raise / overlooked. The advice of WBD therefore is that PO
should not review the 14,000 other KELs unless the Claimants ask for them or Tony's review highlights major
risks that warrant a wider review.
3. If, having understood the above risk, the board still want the 14,000 KELs reviewed by the end of next week:
o Many of the KELs (may be up to 50%) could be duplicates of previously disclosed documents. Because
the KEL is a live database, the KELs could not be extracted in a way to avoid this duplication. A manual
duplication will now be needed. This is much larger pool of documents than we expected needing review
slowing the review process.
o Todo this at pace, this will need to be done by a team of paralegals. A paralegal team (as opposed to
the small dedicated team of lawyers who ran the trial) will create a risk of inaccuracies in the review
process because the KELs are technical in nature. WBD and HSF are confirming resources to deliver
this.
o The technical subject nature of the KELs may cause the review process to run slower than expected as
the material is difficult to comprehend. At the trial, these documents were reviewed at length by the
experts and even they disagreed about their contents.
Kind regards
Rod
Andrew Parsons
Partner
Wombie Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP
POL-0039629
POL00043147
POL00043147
Sign up for legal updates. e-newsletters and event invitations
WOMBLE womblebonddickinson.com
BOND ~~
DICKINSON
POL-0039629