Page 282 - Bundle for MF Final

Bates no 281

2
16 June 2020
MA/JLW/116416/1

hearing which was attached to her position statement. Your client is
aware of this and that it was discussed with her then solicitor, Thomas
Burton-Wills of Grosvenor Law. A cursory look at their file will bear
this out and we are very surprised that you have not done so. We liaised
with the Court and eventually the c01Tect Order was issued. This was
th
served directly on your client on 11 October 2019. To be clear, this
was an error of the Court and not a deliberate act by this firm or our
client. It is one thing to act on your client's instructions but to raise very
serious, unfounded allegations as you have done is quite another. The
conclusion that our client was seeking to obtain disclosure to which he
was not entitled and has since delayed his detailed list of documents in
an attempt to gain an unfair advantage is not only plainly wrong but also
an attempt to subvert the truth of what actually occurred.

• Neither parties position statement was in the bundle which, as you are
fully aware, is common practice. The reason being that the bundle has to
be lodged 2 working days prior to the hearing and position statements
often aren't ready at this stage. The bundle index agreed with your client
(Mr Comer on her behalf) clearly stated that position statements would
th
follow. These were exchanged via email with Mr Comer on 27 January
by which time the bundle had of course been lodged with the court and
the following email sent to Mr Comer:

"Dear Mr Comer

Further to your email below I confirm that ·we can exchange
electronically by email. I suggest we do this at 11 am so (f you can
please email me your statement then and I will email you ours.

You will need to send a copy to the court by email also. The email
address is hearings. brighton. countycourt(a).iusl ice.gov. 11k. Please
ensure you quote the case number and hearing date in the subject box
when you email the court. This should then make irs way lo the Judge
for the hearing tomorrow but I suggest you also take a hard copy with
you tomorrow as well just in case it has not made its way to the correct
Judge."

Mr Comer raised this after the hearing and accused us of altering the
bundle index before it was sent to the Court which obviously, we did
not do, and we confirmed this. Mr Comer also emailed our client's
counsel Mr Anderson directly about this issue and he confirmed that
the Judge had read both position statements and handed them back to
the respective parties at the conclusion of the hearing.

DDJ Robinson was not misdirected in any way. He had clearly read
your client's position statement and spent a significant amount of time
discussing the various issues with her. With respect, we consider that it
is not the fact that the Judge did not have sight of your client's position
statement (which clearly he did) that is the issue, your client was