UKG100009296
UKGI00009296
From: Watson, Richard - UKGI[/O=HMT/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP
(FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=E8568E9D213F4097A7A65F3DA4F63CC1-
WATSON, RICHARD (RWA]
Sent: Tue 19/03/2019 7:54:23 PM (UTC)
To: Cooper, Tom - UKG!
Subject: Re: Official Sensitive: Post Office Litigation Update
Are you free to speak?
Sent from my BlackBerry — the most secure mobile device
From: Tom.Cooper.
Sent: 19 March 201
To: Richard.Watson‘,
Cc: Joshua.Fo:
Subject: Re:
Really?
Sent from my iPhone
On 19 Mar 2019, at 19:41, Watson, Richard - UKGIE
Tom
I spoke again to BEIS Legal. While they agree it is a board decision we think that if
POL decides to make the application it should leave open the possibility that the
Minister, after her discussion with Tim tomorrow, would want to say the shareholder
disagrees. Legally the shareholder cannot force the board not to make the application
and our advice to the Minister is not to get involved but if she is adamant she does not
want it made that may be a matter the board will want to consider.
I am free to speak tonight and anytime before 10am tomorrow and then again between
1 and 2 and then after 5, possibly earlier.
Richard
Sent from my BlackBerry — the most secure mobile device
From: MPST.Tolhurst?
Sent: 19 March
Richard. Watson
Cecilia. Vandinif”
Subject: RE: Official Sensitive: Post Office Litigation Update
Hi Tom,
UKG100009296
UKGI00009296
I would suggest picking this up once we have an update following any discussions between SoS/Kelly this
evening.
Kelly has a debate tomorrow afternoon so it is likely it would be early evening if a call is to take place.
Please let me know if and when the decision to make an application has been made.
Thanks,
Jess
Jessica Tysoe
Private Secretary to Kelly Tolhurst MP
1 Victoria Street, London, SW1H OET
i }I_mpst.tolhurst”
From: Cooper, Tom - UKGE.
Sent: 19 March 2019 18:12
To: Tolhurst, Mpst (BEIS}
Idred, Tom - UKG!
Secretary,”
Gareth (BEISI
Lambert, Lucie - UKGE
Watson, Craig (Advanced Manufacturing and Service: ‘andini, Cecilia
(Advanced Manufacturing and Services) (~~ Beckett, Richard (BEIS)
Lambert, Gavin (Advanced Manufacturing and Services)
Subject: Re: Official Sensitive: Post Office Litigation Update
Should I put Tim Parker and Al Cameron on notice for a call tomorrow then? Please note that Tim Parker
is out of the country at the moment and he might be hard to reach especially at short notice.
Tom
Sent from my iPhone
On 19 Mar 2019, at 17:15, Tolhurst, Mpst (BEIS);~
Hi Tom, and thanks to Stephen for his email earlier,
I briefly discussed this with Kelly over the phone and as expected she has concerns.
Immediately she said she would raise with SoS, I have flagged this to his office, and I
believe she has already contacted him.
She agreed that they shouldn’t do anything until after the decision has been made at the
board meeting/call tomorrow and it is likely that she will want another call with Tim Parker
and Al Cameron after this to ask them to explain their reasoning behind their change of
mind.
I will keep you updated on any outcomes of her discussion with SoS.
Kind regards,
Jess
UKG100009296
UKGI00009296
<image003.png> Jessica Tysoe
Private Secretary to Kelly Tolhurst MP
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State
Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
1 Victoria Street, London, SW1H OET
www.gov.uk/beis I_https://twitter.com/beisgovuk
From: Aldred, Tom - UK
Sent: 19 March 2019 16:24
olhurst, Mpst (BEIS)
Permanent Secretar
Services);
Vandini, Cecilia (Advanced Manufacturing and Services)
Beckett, Richard (BEIS
Manufacturing and Services
Subject: RE: Official Sensitive: Post Office Litigation Update
Jess
We spoke. To confirm, POL have a Board call tomorrow at which they will take the
decision. The strong legal advice is that the minister should not be involved in this
decision. We advise the best time for a call with POL would be after a decision has
been taken, so that POL could explain their reasoning for the change of mind (if
that is the case), since the weekend’s call with the minister
Tom
Tom Aldred, Post Office Shareholder Team, UKGI
T:
From: Clarke, Stephen - UKGI
Sent: 19 March 2019 15:49
To: Tolhurst, Mpst (BEIS}~
Cc: Clark Spad, Mpst (BEIS)
Permanent Secretary
pst (I Evans,
atson, Richard - UKGI
Fox,
Joshua - UK
Services)!”
Aldred, Tom - UKG'
d Services) ¢.
“Nandini, Cecilia (Advanced Manufacturing
eckett, Richard (BEIS)
ambert, Gavin (Advanced Manufacturing and Services)
Post Office Litigation Update
UKG100009296
UKGI00009296
Official Sensitive and Subject to Legal Privilege — do not forward outside this distribution
Jess,
As discussed with Tom and Craig, see below an update for the Minister on POL’s response
to Friday’s judgement. I also attach POL’s first report on the second (Horizon Issues) trial
that started on 11 March.
“As you know POL have been considering possible grounds of appeal. One of those
grounds is that the judge has acted in a procedurally unfair way by making findings of fact
which are not relevant to the determination of the common issues trial and upon which
there had not been full disclosure between the parties, both of documents and witness
evidence. Part of POL's argument on appeal is that the judge has improperly allowed his
findings on post contractual events to influence his ruling on what the terms of the
contracts were between POL and Postmasters. That is legally impermissible. Linked to this
unfairness issue is a real concern that the Judge made findings of fact in such a way as to
betray a prejudice to POL which means it would no longer be fair for the Judge to continue
to hear the proceedings in the current and any future trials. As you are aware, the judge is
currently hearing the second trial, which started on 11 March, and POL feel that the
findings in the first trial may adversely impact the fairness of the litigation. Given all the
above, POL appear likely to make an application for the judge to take no further part in the
litigation (i.e. to recuse himself from proceedings).
Applications for recusals such as this are rare, especially in circumstances that do not
involve a conflict of interest on the part of the judge, but rather are based on procedural
unfairness. If such an application is made, it is likely to generate significant media
attention. However, POL have taken additional legal advice from very senior barristers
who have not had any prior involvement in the case and so have an independent
viewpoint. While the legal advice could change, the current legal advice is a clear
recommendation in favour of seeking a recusal. Tom Cooper’s feedback from the recent
POL board call on this topic is that the board are not enthusiastic about making this
application but feel there is no option given the additional legal advice received. This is
particularly the case given that the second trial is currently being heard by the same judge
and includes testimony from witnesses who have been discredited in the first judgment.
The advice from BEIS Legal and UKGI Legal is that BEIS officials/Ministers and the
shareholder NED should not be involved in POL’s formal decision-making on the recusal
application, although they may participate in discussions and hear the advice from POL’s
legal team. A final decision on whether to make this application is likely to be made on
Wednesday 20 March. If POL decide to proceed we will let you know and provide defensive
lines. If you require further detail on the legal arguments underpinning the application for
recusal we can arrange a call to include Post Office.”
Stephen Clarke I Post Office Shareholder Team
UK Government Investments
Corporate finance and governance in government.
1 Victoria Street I London I SW1H OET
UKG100009296
UKGI00009296
This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the
individual(s) to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient and
have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete the email. This
footnote also confirms that our email communications may be monitored to ensure
the secure and effective operation of our systems and for other lawful purposes, and
that this email has been swept for malware and viruses.
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com