WBONO0001270
WBON0001270
From: Simon Henderson
To: 'Anthony de Garr Robinson’
, Amy Prime!
Ce: Andrew Parsons , Jonathan Gribben
Subject: RE: Stage 3 Disclosure - Project Zebra [WBDUK-AC.FID26896945]
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2018 06:40:13 +0000
Importance: Normal
Yes that should be fine
Simon
From: Anthony de Garr Robinson [mailto;
Sent: 26 July 2018 20:37
my Prime
Ce: Andrew Parson
Jonathan Gribber
Stage 3 Disclosure - Project Zebra [WBDUK-AC.FID26896945]
: Private
Simon Hendersoni
Thanks, Amy.
3.15 would suit me - how about you, Simon? Would that give you enough time to research the points we
discussed?
Tony
On 26 Jul 2018, at 20:18, Amy Prime < GRO. h<mailto! GRO. >> wrote:
Tony
Thank you for the below, we are seeking clarification and instructions from Post Office on this. We can be
available for a conference call on Monday between 9am and Ipm or from 3.15pm onwards. Please could you
let me know if there is a time which suits you best?
Kind regards
Amy
Amy Prime
Solicitor
Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP
d:
WBD_001140.000001
WBONO0001270
WBON0001270
Stay informed: sign up to our e-alerts<https://www.womblebonddickinson.com/uk/preferences>
<imagef22c65.PNG>
womblebonddickinson.com<http://www.womblebonddickinson.com>
<image654c17.PNG><http://www.twitter.com/wbd_uk> <imagef36868.PNG>
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/womble-bond-dickinson-uk-IIp/>
From: Anthony de Garr Robinson [mail
Sent: 26 July 2018 17:55
To: Andrew Parsons; Amy Prime; Simon Henderson
Ce: Jonathan Gribben
Subject: RE: Stage 3 Disclosure - Project Zebra [WBDUK-AC.FID26896945]
Sensitivity: Private
Dear Amy,
This is an awkward issue. If we get it wrong — either by claiming too much privilege or too little — it could be
very damaging for the client.
Simon and I have had quite a long discussion and we are likely to conclude that privilege cannot be claimed
over the whole of the Zebra Action Summary but the parts which repeat or summarise the contents of the
Deloitte report can be redacted. However, we have identified a number of questions which should be
answered before final conclusions can properly be drawn. Some are factual and some are legal.
As you anticipated, we need further information regarding the background to the Deloitte report and the
Zebra Action Summary and would be grateful for clear instructions on the following points:
1. Is it definitely the case that the dominant purpose for which the Deloitte report was obtaining legal advice
about or obtaining information in connection with the conduct of anticipated litigation? We ask because
section I of the report records (amongst other things) that Deloitte were appointed to raise suggestions for
potential improvements in the assurance provision for Horizon and the final section of the report contains 6
pages of recommendations to management to strengthen the quality and assurance in place over the Horizon
system. What we are hoping to receive is factual instructions allowing us to be clear that the Deloitte report
was not created for two equal purposes, one of which was anticipated litigation and the other was making
Horizon more robust (compare the unsuccessful claim to privilege made in relation to the accident report in
Waugh v British Railways Board).
1. Who produced the Zebra Action Summary, who was it produced for and for what purpose was it
produced? To whom was it disseminated and what actions were taken as a result of it?
1, What was the source and purpose of the “recommended remediations” set out in the Zebra Action
Summary For example, were they recommendations produced by management of changes to be made in the
systems around Horizon with a view to giving effect to recommendations of a more general nature made in
the Deloitte report?
1. Were these “recommended remediations” actually implemented?
1. Who were the parties to the email you attached (Julie George, Lesley Sewell, Rod Ismay, David Mason,
Malcolm Zack and Gina Gould) and why was the Zebra Action Summary sent to them? Were they part of the
Post Office litigation team concerned with subpostmaster claims, for example, or were they management
WBD_001140.000002
WBONO0001270
WBON0001270
people responsible for deciding what improvements to make to the Horizon systems, or what?
With clear answers to these questions, and a bit of research from Simon, we can then take a final view.
Should we pencil in a telecon on Monday afternoon?
Best wishes,
Tony
>>
ithony de Garr Robinson < >>; Amy Prime
~ GRO ilto:¢
< ___GRO
Ce: Jonathan Gribben =
Subject: RE: Stage 3 Disclosure - Project Zebra [WBDUK-AC.FID26896945]
Sensitivity: Private
“>>; Simon Henderson
>>
Tony
Thanks. I can only give a second-hand answer to question 1, because I was not involved in the first Deloitte
report. My understanding is that the report was produced on the recommendation of Linklaters and for the
purpose of understanding Post Office's litigation risk if the mediation scheme collapsed. We will however
speak to Rod to confirm this.
On question 2, we don't know the answer but I presume that there may be other similar documents out there.
However we only need to disclose those documents that fall within our Model C disclosure classes and only
after having conducted a reasonable search. So far, this is the only document on this nature that we have
found. Note — there are several other documents about Zebra but these are reports by lawyers and so are
privileged.
A
Andrew Parsons
Partner
Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP
Stay informed: sign up to our e-alerts<https://www.womblebonddickinson.com/uk/preferences>
<image001.png>
womblebonddickinson.com<http://www.womblebonddickinson.com>
<image002.png><http://www.twitter.com/wbd_uk>
WBD_001140.000003
WBONO0001270
WBON0001270
<image003.png><https://www.linkedin.com/company/womble-bond-dickinson-uk-Ilp/>
From: Anthony de Garr Robinson [mailto?
Sent: 26 July 2018 13:30
To: Amy Prime; Simon Henderson
Cc: Jonathan Gribben; Andrew Parsons
Subject: RE: Stage 3 Disclosure - Project Zebra [WBDUK-AC.FID26896945]
Sensitivity: Private
Thanks for your email, Amy.
Simon and I will be discussing this later today. In the meantime, there are a couple of questions you might be
able to help me with.
First, the Deloitte report was marked “Privileged”. Is this because the report was commissioned for the
dominant purpose of obtaining legal advice about, or helping in the conduct of, anticipated litigation? Is it
definitely the case that an equally important purpose was not (say) reducing the incidence or risk of
undetected Horizon accounting errors in the future?
Second, am I right in thinking that there are lots of documents out there charting the steps taken to
implement Deloitte’s recommendations, that these steps included numerous changes that were made in
Horizon and/or in the systems and processes supporting, improving or ensuring the proper use of Horizon
and that some the relevant documents (at least) indicate that the relevant steps are being taken as a result of
Deloitte’s recommendations will have the relevant documents? Have these documents been / are they going
to be disclosed and if not, why not?
Best wishes,
Tony
From: Amy Prime <_
Sent: 25 July 2018 21:34
To: Anthony de Garr Robinson ¢
Henderson <
Ce: Jonathan Gribben +
Parsons <777-~ 7
Subject: Stage 3 Disclosure - Project Zebra [WBDUK-AC.FID26896945]
Sensitivity: Private
Tony, Simon
In 2014 and as part of the Mediation Scheme, Linklaters produced a piece of advice for Post Office on the
complaints made by SPMRs about Horizon. A copy of this advice is attached. Linklaters recommended that
Deloitte undertake a review of the integrity of Horizon — this review is known as Project Zebra and a copy of
Deloitte's report is also attached.
Whilst Deloitte's report itself is covered by privilege and the Cs do not know of the existence of this report,
we have come across an ancillary document which followed on from the report and discusses how to
implement the findings within the business. This document falls within one of the Stage 3 Disclosure Classes
and we are concerned that we are not able to assert privilege over this document (or privilege would be
limited to those sections which refer to the Deloitte Report directly). I have attached the email chain but the
document of interest is the Zebra Action Summary attached to the email.
We would welcome your thoughts on whether privilege can be asserted over the Zebra Action Summary, if
parts of the document can be redacted for privilege or if the full document needs to be disclosed.
Tf you require any further information about the background to this document please let me know.
Kind regards
WBD_001140.000004
WBONO0001270
WBON0001270
Amy
Amy Prime
Solicitor
Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP
Stay informed: sign up to our e-alerts<https://www.womblebonddickinson.com/uk/preferences>
<image001.png>
womblebonddickinson.com<http://www.womblebonddickinson.com>
<image002.png><http://Avww.twitter.com/wbd_uk>
<image003.png><https://www.linkedin.com/company/womble-bond-dickinson-uk-IIp/>
Please consider the environment! Do you need to print this email?
Simon Henderson
4 Pump Court, Temple, London, EC4Y 7AN I www.4pumpcourt.com
Follow us on twitter @4PumpCourt
iI View Profile Connect with us on Linkedin
Pump Court International I www.pumpcourtinternational.com
Terms of Work: Barristers at 4 Pump Court carry out services on 4 Pump Court Terms, which are available on our website,
unless otherwise agreed in writing, I View Terms
Privacy: Your attention is drawn to our Privacy Notice in relation to any personal data that we may obtain and/or otherwise
process about you. I View Privacy Notice
Notice of Confidentiality and Privilege: This email (including attachments) is confidential to the addressee, and may be subject
to legal professional privilege. If you are not the addressee, you must not copy, distribute or otherwise use it or any information
contained in this email. Please delete it, and destroy all copies
WBD_001140.000005
WBONO0001270
WBON0001270
The information in this e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may be legally privileged and
protected by law. arobinsory ~_& only is authorised to access
this e-mail and any attachm ailto:! by
please notify amy.prime! as soon as possible and delete an}
copies. Unauthorised use, dissemination, distribution, publication or copying of this communication or
attachments is prohibited and may be unlawful. Information about how we use personal data is in our
Privacy Policy<https://www.womblebonddickinson.com/uk/privacy-policy> on our website.
Any files attached to this e-mail will have been checked by us with virus detection software before
transmission. Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP accepts no liability for any loss or damage which may be
caused by software viruses and you should carry out your own virus checks before opening any attachment.
Content of this email which does not relate to the official business of Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP, is
neither given nor endorsed by it.
This email is sent by Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP which is a limited liability partnership registered
in England and Wales under number OC317661. Our registered office is 4 More London Riverside, London,
SEI 2AU, where a list of members’ names is open to inspection. We use the term partner to refer to a
member of the LLP, or an employee or consultant who is of equivalent standing. Our VAT registration
number is GB123393627.
Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP is a member of Womble Bond Dickinson (International) Limited, which
consists of independent and autonomous law firms providing services in the US, the UK, and elsewhere
around the world. Each Womble Bond Dickinson entity is a separate legal entity and is not responsible for
the acts or omissions of, nor can bind or obligate, another Womble Bond Dickinson entity. Womble Bond
Dickinson (International) Limited does not practice law. Please see
www.womblebonddickinson.com/legal<http://www.womblebonddickinson.com/legal> notices for further
details.
Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.
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
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
WBD_001140.000006
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
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
WBONO0001270
WBON0001270
WBD_001140.000007