UKG100009285
UKG100009285
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachment:
Attachment:
Attachment:
Attachment:
Attachment:
Attachment:
Attachment:
Attachment:
Alex
Cooper, Tom - UKGI[/O=HMT/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP
(FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=8D968D43E33749AE9E59F9C9350E69D5-
COOPER, THOMAS (TCOO]
Tue 19/03/2019 7:09:49 PM (UTC)
Alex Chisholm[,
Fwd: Recusal CONFIDENTIAL AND SUBJECT TO LEGAL PRIVILEGE
image001.png
ATTOO001.htm
Post Office - Recusal Note (003)tb. 17.3.19.pdf
ATT00002.htm
4852_001.pdf
ATTO0003.htm
Recusal 2019-3-18 v2.docx
ATT00004.htm
Papers attached. We’re told that Grabiner is more bullish than Neuberger. We’re meeting him tomorrow.
We’ve asked if the advice is being firmed up before a decision is taken.
POL has also now added Norton Rose to act as shadow and advise the Board. They are joining the Board
meeting tomorrow.
I'll be off the train at around 8.
Tom
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: <Iom.Cooperi_ GRO
Date: 17 March 2019 a
To: <Richard. Watsor i
Subject: Fwd: Recusal C
Will need your help with this
Tom
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
UKG100009285
UKGI00009285
Subject: Fwd: Recusal CONFIDENTIAL AND SUBJECT TO LEGAL
PRIVILEGE
From: Jane MacLeod
Sent: Sunday, March 17, 2019 10:40:35 PM
To: Tim Parker; Ken McCall1; Carla Stent1; Thomas Cooper; Shirine Khoury-Haq;
Tim.Franklin1
Ce: Alisdair Cameron; Paula Vennells; Veronica Branton
Subject: Recusal CONFIDENTIAL AND SUBJECT TO LEGAL PRIVILEGE
All
As flagged last week, the judgment in the Common Issues Trial was handed down on Friday
in substantially similar form to the embargoed draft. We must now turn to the questions
as to what are our legal options, and how do we address the consequences of the
judgment from an operational perspective?
Board Timetable
We have arranged 2 board calls this week (Monday at 5.15 pm and Wednesday at 12.30
pm) in addition to the scheduled Board meeting on 25 March. We propose that we discuss
the ‘recusal option’ at the Board call tomorrow (Monday) evening, as there are adverse
consequences if we delay. Wednesday had been proposed to discuss the operational
impacts and mitigating plans, however if thought appropriate, this discussion could be
addressed at the scheduled Board meeting next Monday.
Recusal
Attached are the following papers:
e Draft paper from me (‘Recusal 2019-3-18’) which recommends the recusal
application and retained counsel;
e Lord Neuberger’s preliminary advice (‘4852 001.pdf’) as to appeal and recusal
received on Thursday 14 March; and
e Advice from WBD (‘Post Office - Recusal Note’), which has been reviewed by
David Cavendar QC and which Lord Grabiner has seen, and verbally endorsed.
The Counsel team, with which I concur, recommends bringing an application for recusal.
As set out in the attached papers, this is not without risk. However there are equally, risks
of not bringing the recusal application (as set out in both my and WBD’s paper), and on
balance my view is that the risks of not bringing the application for recusal (predominantly
the risk of an adverse outcome in the current Horizon trial and the ‘third trial’ due to the
Judge’s decision that Post Office witnesses are ‘unreliable’) outweigh those of making the
application, although this is a finely balanced consideration, and the Board may consider
these risks differently.
Unfortunately Lord Grabiner has a prior commitment and cannot make the 5.15 board call
tomorrow. At the time of writing I believe that Lord Neuberger QC will be available to dial
in to the Board discussion, notwithstanding he is currently in South America.
UKG100009285
UKGI00009285
I appreciate these are difficult decisions and the requirement for them to be made ina
truncated timetable is not ideal . I am available during most of tomorrow (Monday) should
anyone wish to discuss these ahead of the Board call.
Kind regards,
Jane