WBON0001888 - Typed version of handwritten note by Tom Beezer

Evidence on official site

2-4-2019
POL OEC WBD
- Rob / Jane/ Mark - Lord Grabiner - TB
- Andrew P - Amy
- 2.45 > 3.10pm - Gideon
- DCQC.
AGQC:
Nothing changes

- Judge came to concluded view only in relation to matters
B4 him. Nonsense. Matters not B4 him. Conc’ views

re matters before him were only contract issues.

They say the matters on which were conc' view were in fact
B4 him. nonsense. He was warned many times.

oral + written. O/S made some play we x examined

on topics — we did that because we not want to leave
uncontradicted BUT not follow that those matters became
part of the common issues.

They drive wedge between Judge + C's as they do say

concluded view. Judge could have said can change
Mind BUT o/s say concluded.

AG_207474712_1

WBON0001888
WBON0001888

WBON0001887_0001
AGQC:

We go first tomorrow. May not get Judgment tomorrow
Validity of position turns exclusively on the Judgement

and examine what the common issues were. May view (QC)
is judge comes on very strong and comes to offensive
concluded views about POL and witnesses. My view say
should recuse. I don't know him.

Team have say he will reject and will reject
leave. We will need to ask the CofA for leave.

ACQC: Rest of CIT judgment is low grade — need to get to
CofA anyway. We need offensive passages in Judgment.
Won't need re-trial common issues. CofA can put it

right. The rest of judgment innocuous. Would leave
matters should have been deciding.

AGQC: That is my view big picture

Rod: if refused and timing?

AGQC: Answer to Q depends on Judges reaction. If he
refuses and he seeks continue HIT then urgent to

stay HIT. Could combine recusal + CIT general

appeal. Would give CofA better total view

Jane: any surprises?

ACQC: No

They have not majored on arg’ the Judge capable keep open
mind. They have majored on point that judge decided

on matters before him. So they take view that Judge

has come to firm conclusions. And this could take

them into conflict with the judges position.

Rod — PlanB

AGQC — The judgment is our case. The o/s
made the contrary.

AC_207474712_1

WBON0001888
WBON0001888

WBON0001887_0002