POL00198766 - Post Office Ltd Clarification

Evidence on official site

POL00198766
POL00198766

THIS DOCUMENT IS SUBJECT TO LEGAL PROFESSIONAL PRIVILEGE AND MUST NOT BE DISCLOSED TO ANY PERSON
WITHOUT THE EXPRESS AUTHORITY OF POST OFFICE LTD GENERAL COUNSEL OR CARTWRIGHT KING SOLICITRS.

POST OFFICE LTD

CLARIFICATION

1. I am asked to clarify the meaning of paragraph 4iii. of my Note dated the 12"

December 2013. That paragraph reads as follows:

4. The result of this process therefore is three-fold:

i. POL is protected from Malicious Prosecution claims by the very
process used to initiate and pursue prosecutions;

ii. Should a legitimate claim for Malicious Prosecution emerge, that claim

would properly stand against prosecuting solicitors and not POL;

iii. That protection would not be available to an organisation which
conducted its prosecutions ‘in-house’, that is, in POL’s case, using
lawyers employed directly by POL.

2. POL does not conduct its prosecutions ‘in-house’; that term denotes the direct
employment of lawyers by the prosecuting agency, i.e. as directly-paid employees of
Post Office Ltd. Were POL to conduct prosecutions using lawyers directly employed
by POL then those lawyers would advise POL on matters related to whether or not a
prosecution should be commenced and would conduct prosecutions on behalf of POL.
It follows that the decisions of those employed lawyers would be subject to scrutiny
were there to be a claim in Malicious Prosecution, and POL would be answerable for

the actions of those employed lawyers.

3. Thus the main disadvantage of the process of conducting prosecutions ‘in-house’ using
directly-employed lawyers is that of a perceived lack of independence, thereby giving
rise to the potential for allegations of bias, undue pressure and worse. It is in this

context that a claim for Malicious Prosecution may arise, because the protection
POL00198766
POL00198766

THIS DOCUMENT IS SUBJECT TO LEGAL PROFESSIONAL PRIVILEGE AND MUST NOT BE DISCLOSED TO ANY PERSON
WITHOUT THE EXPRESS AUTHORITY OF POST OFFICE LTD GENERAL COUNSEL OR CARTWRIGHT KING SOLICITRS.

offered by the independent scrutiny and advice offered by the engagement of outside

lawyers is absent.

4. The process currently operated by (POL) necessarily involves the instructing of
independent solicitors, Cartwright King Solicitors and it is for this reason that the

protection against suit for Malicious Prosecution is available to POL. I reiterate :

a. when POL initiates a prosecution, it only does so only after having obtained

the considered advice of independent lawyers;

b. where a prosecution is conducted it is done so by independent lawyers.

c. Thus, where POL follows it’s established procedure of instructing outside
independent lawyers to advise upon and conduct prosecutions, those
prosecutions are subject to independent scrutiny sufficient that any claim for
Malicious Prosecution will lie against those outside lawyers (Cartwright King

Solicitors), they having advised on and conducted the prosecution.

Simon Clarke 12” September 2013
Senior counsel

Cartwright King Solicitors