WBON0001737 - Tom Beezer notes re: Lord Grabiner QC conference

Evidence on official site

WBON0001737

WBON0001737
1
18-3-2019

Tom Beezer notes

Lord Grabiner QC conf’

@ OEC 18 March 2019

2pm — 3.20pm
AGQC
DCQC
Gideon C

- Draft J'ment

- notes

- Agree Neuberger view
- Procedural structure:

- procedure presupposes no arg’ by way
appeal. relationship contracts.
20+ implied terms
danger — serious errors
want to go to CT' appeal
BUT 2" contract underway
Findings impact 2" Trial
Really poor case management

«Case mgnt' barking

* Supposed to be Trial CIT
To determine what contract was
AND implied terms — if any
BUT what he has done >
trespassed into matters for later
stages.
not been able to restrain himself
from straying into later matters.

Finding breaches
Finding facts

AC_207460560_1 1

WBON0001736_0001
Judge investigates these extra matters
despite strike out applic’.

Judge regards extra stuff as relevant he is
investigating. Gone too far.

Judge reaches conclusions w/o POL
evidence.

Judge take leave of senses
Judge forming facts & concluded views
in this mind.

won't be able to shift him from concluded
views. Will be tied to Judgment 1.

is a dogs breakfast

But now sequence of trials

- But have to ask him to recuse

Strong advice to do it = recuse
Strong arguments to support complaint
you have to do it.

‘AC_207460560_1

WBON0001737
WBON0001737

WBON0001736_0002
1) recusal
2) Adjourn current trial
3) permission CofA

Recusal to be done deal urgency

APPEAL:
Implied term analysis is rubbish
shocking
"relational" contract = codswallop
implication of good faith is developing
but gone too far
BIG important issues

- First point recusal + adjournment
application.
- make ASAP. But prepare.
- Gideon doing schedule:
- what CIT issues are
- Implied terms
Then how J'ment proceeded — how
matters in J'ment by topic went beyond
into later trial areas. (Breach/damages)

Then quotes which reveal concluded

view on POL behaviour.
List it all out.

‘AC_207460560_1

WBON0001737
WBON0001737

WBON0001736_0003
Jane:

Appeal on law

recusal. Hugely sensitive.
Sensitive given our ownership.
UKGI will not be involved in
overseeing BEIS — Greg Clarke

UKG Investment holds the shares
— They have oversight of POL

POL has been criticised - harsh & oppressive

Number of time
Board worried that look aggressive.

If don't take action will lose.

AGQC

- Board has no choice

- Strong view right course action

- Ithink you have a strong case.

- Ido think serious prospect of success
Judge has done unbelievable nonsense
Judge has apparent bias
Have no choice

Appeal on law w/o recusal goes back
to him. Hopeless.

‘AC_207460560_1

WBON0001737
WBON0001737

WBON0001736_0004
David Neuberger has a v. clear view.
Board has to do what it has to do. Has:
no choice.

of Board of 8 2 are conflicted
- Ken McCall SiD
- Carla Audit
- Chief oo Lloyds

we will proceed on basis will prepare.

must get on with it.

Confident success CofA

On going trial — so urgent matter.
JANE

Inst' =» prepare on basis will go.

Need to get Board over line.

Call today.

Sch B meet next Monday.

‘AC_207460560_1

WBON0001737
WBON0001737

WBON0001736_0005
WBON0001737

WBON0001737
6
Send DCQC version PDF
* DCQC
If no recusal — appeal on law
Court may ask why not ask recusal
DCQC
Real issue is decisions in Horizon trial
are happening now — expert view —
has to decide between — once done
we are stuck with that for all time
for a breach trial.
So if not seek recusal H trial
rolls on. w/o recusal CofA
not urgent — so H trial
finishes and we are stuck with
facts found.
Lord G:
- reputable lawyers say get on with it
do duty to company.
They have obligation to get on with it.
Apparent bias — not actual bias
seems he has reached a concluded view
AGQC — apt no choice. Got v. case to make
applic.
AC_207460560_1 6

WBON0001736_0006
WBON0001737
WBON0001737

If I thought 50/50 would say so.
he has gone v. badly wrong
business must get on with it. have to do it.

no choice
Stand up be counted.

‘AC_207460560_1

WBON0001736_0007