POL00103599
POL00103599
Message
From: Alisdair Cameron! 7
on behalf of — Alisdair Cameron}
Sent: 27/06/2019 13
To: Watts, Alani
ce:
Subject:
So it is hard to gauge without seeing the letter but the sensitivity is anything that looks like we aren’t changing
our approach and are doubling down again. I appreciate you have already ruled out a more incendiary thought
from the new QC....1 am copying Tim, Tom and Ken as the other members of the sub-committee with
apologies for urgency, for other views. If a call is needed, tonight or first thing is clearly required. Kind regards
Al
Al Cameron
Interim Chief Executive
20 Finsbury Street
London
EC2Y 9AQ
From: Watts, Alan
Sent: 27 June 2019 1:
To: Alisdair Cameron
Ce: Rodric Williams!
; Massey, Kirsten Henderson, Tom
Subject: Privileged & Confidential
Aland Ben,
By way of update on the Common Issues appeal, in light of the terms of Coulson L!’s Order of last week (refusing expedition
and restricting the skeleton), Helen Davies has been revisiting in her mind the question of whether there is anything we
can or should be doing to seek to ensure that the permission application is not finally determined by Coulson L sitting
alone. Helen was surprised by both the content and also the tone of his Order.
There is extremely limited opportunity in the Court rules to ask for someone other than Coulson LI alone to determine the
application for permission to appeal. There is, however, a limited rule which can enable a direction for an oral hearing in
an appropriate case and moreover which can be directed to be heard by a panel comprising judges other than the just the
original single Lord Justice. We're working with Helen to produce a letter this afternoon which would accompany the
revised Skeleton (due tomorrow, 28 June) which seeks to request an oral hearing before a panel of judges in a way which
doesn’t undermine the strength of the application. We will share the letter with you as soon as completed.
The obvious risk is that Coulson LJ is further driven by the letter to seek to find ways to refuse the application. However,
we will not be including anything in the letter that suggests any potential bias on the part of Coulson. Our position will be
that an oral hearing is suitable given this is a complex appeal concerning important and novel legal issues. It is also fair to
POL-0103182
POL00103599
POL00103599
say that the Coulson risk already exists and therefore sending the proposed letter may potentially best protect Post
Office’s interests.
We also explored with Helen the possibility of her sending the letter. She isn't keen on the basis that (1) a letter from
Counsel will look much more like a Skeleton and potentially infuriate Coulson LJ as a perceived attempt to bypass the 50
page limit and (2) with Coulson LJ I suspect in any event it might backfire as he could (wrongly) perceive it as an attempt
by a commercial silk to throw weight around.
As an alternative we thought that we could come on the record for Post Office in the appeal only (at this stage) and send
the letter. This shows a break with WBD and the team behind the recusal application which may be colouring Coulson's
attitude.
Given that the letter is going to be written in extremely neutral terms, and the Coulson risk appears to be very real, we
would be inclined to send it. However, appreciate its finely balanced.
We'll need to send this out during the course of tomorrow so ideally we should settle our instructions today if
possible. Please let me know if helpful to discuss. I will be over for the Steering Group Meeting at 4.
Regards
Alan
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its subsidiaries and Herbert Smith Freehills, an Australian Partnership, are separate member firms of the
international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills.
This message is confidential and may be covered by legal professional privilege. If you are not the intended recipient you must not disclose or use the
information contained in it. Ifyou have received this email in error please notify us immediately by return email or by calling our main switchboard
on and delete the email.
Further information is available from yw her chills.com, including our Privacy Policy which describes how we handle personal
information.
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP is a Limited Liability Partnership registered in England and Wales with registered number 0C310989. It is authorised
and regulated by the Solicitors’ Regulation Authority of England and Wales whose rules can be accessed via www.sta.org.ukcode:
A list of the members and their professional qualifications is open to inspection at the registered office, Exchange House, Primrose Street, London
EC2A 2EG. We use the word partner of Herbert Smith Freehills LLP to refer to a member of Herbert Smith Freehills LLP, or an employee or
consultant with equivalent standing and qualifications. Herbert Smith Freehills LLP's registration number for Value Added Tax in the United
Kingdom is GB 927 1996 83.
POL-0103182