From: Amy Prime <_
To: "Matthew.Lent
Ce: "pete.newsomd
"Legal.Defencé GRO.
<.. wo----GRO__., Lucy Bremner
Subject: KEL Index [WBDUK-AC.FID26896945]
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 10:42:02 +0000
Importance: Normal
Attachments: Historic_Kels.xlsx; Active_Kels.xlsx; KELS_not_in_Index.xlsx
Inline-Images: image553996.PNG; imagefac05e.PNG; imagedc2d96.PNG
WBON0001972
WBON0001972
Gribben
Hi Matthew
I hope you are well.
Back in January of this year you provided us with two indexes of the KEL, an historic and active index (both attached).
We have noticed that there are a number of KEL entries which were in the KEL extraction, but not contained within
either of these indexes — a list of these KEL entries is also attached.
From a brief review, the KEL entries which are not in either of these indexes have a wide date range between 1999
and 2018 so I don't think the entries were generated after the indexes were produced. Please could you have a look
into whether there is a reason that the extract contained more KEL entries then were listed in the indexes?
Separately, would you be able to provide us with a list of KEL entries which have been produced from 19 March 2018
to date?
Kind regards
Amy
Amy Prime
Solicitor
Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP
Stay informed: sign up to our e-alerts
WOMBLE womblebonddickinson.com
BOND
DICKINSON wv fin)