POL00323677
POL00323677
From: Jarnail A Singh[/O=MMS/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP
(FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=JARNAIL.A.SINGH6CEADABD-67E9-4ECA-94F2-
005716658847]
Sent: Fri 20/09/2013 10:25:16 AM (UTC)
To: Susan CrichtonI
Cc: Rodric William:
Clarkef
Hugh Flemington]
Subject: RE: Fujitsu Lawyers and the Friday Conference Call.
Susan
I refer to Martin’s email below. I agree we have to be very cautious and tread careful to invite third party to Friday
conference call. I can foresee problems of protecting pol position on issues of privilege and need to have a carefully
set agenda for such a meeting. This is something Rodric and Andy may need to consider and advice on from civil
litigation view point.
Jarnail Singh I Criminal Lawyer
ta 148 Old Street, LONDON, EC1V 9HQ
@
©
Y
©
}Postline:.
Mobex:
(=) Post Office stories
@® @postofficenews
From: martin smith [mailto:
Sent: 19 September 2013 2:
To: Susan Crichton
Cc: Jarnail A Singh; Rodric Williams; Simon Clarke; Andrew Bolc
Subject: RE: Fujitsu Lawyers and the Friday Conference Call.
Susan,
Many thanks for your e-mail. I have been considering the position today and I remain extremely
nervous about having Fujitsu’s lawyers on the Friday conference call. At the present time only
POL lawyers and lawyers instructed by POL are on the call. If Fujitsu’s lawyers are on the call they
will have a duty to report the entire contents of the call back to their client.
Whilst there may be merit in us meeting with the Fujitsu lawyers if, for example, they are able to
POL00323677
POL00323677
assist with disclosure etc, I think that such meetings should be on an ad hoc basis and with very
clear and limited agendas. With a conference call there is in my opinion a greater risk that the
Fujitsu lawyers may try to raise issues which we/you would prefer not to be discussed in front of
them.
I will be out of the office tomorrow and so my colleague Andrew Bole will be dialling in to
provide the weekly update. If we are to meet with the Fujitsu lawyers in due course, I think that it
would first be appropriate for us to have a chat about the agenda and the issues which may well
arise.
So far as Simon’s Advice in relation to GJ is concerned, I understand that it was drafted with the
knowledge that it may well be disclosed and so I would have no objection to that. The Scope
document is work in progress and will most probably be perfected in the near future.
Kind regards
Martin.
From: Susan Crichton [mailto#~
Sent: 18 September 2013 16:02
To: martin smith
Cc: Jarnail A Singh; Rodric Williams
Subject:
Martin
I met with our relationship manager and one of the lawyers from Fujitsu today, Michael Harvey, a couple of issues
have come out from our conversation which I think that we should discuss and wonder if you would be happy for him
to join our call at 4 on Friday afternoon. If that works for you I think that he should see the advice re Gareth Jenkins
and the proposed scope for the expert before our call — are you happy me to send these documents through to him.
Thanks
Susan
Susan Crichton I General Counsel
I Wing, 44 treet, London, EC1V 9HQ
GRO _ iio GRO}
POL00323677
POL00323677
This email and any attachments are confidential and intended for the addressee only. If you are not the named
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: 148 OLD STREET,
LONDON EC1V 9HQ.
Je SR SSDI II IIIS IIS IID IODIDE ESI III III IO IIIS II IOI.