Page 642 - Driving Ban Simulation 1

THE RECORDER: Well, listen. I think I’m — I’m -- sort of jumping the gun here. We’re --
concerned about the civil aspect of this.
MR POTTINGER: Yes.
THE RECORDER: And it may be that it will come to a position when in fact we can’t carry
on. But from what I’ve heard from the two of you at the moment, let’s get
on with it. And if it gets to that point and we think there’s been an injustice
done because it needs more input from KGM, then we’ll say so. My
concern is this -I’m quite frank - that I think this would be the simplest
thing in the world to sort out, that somebody ought to get a letter from
KGM and say, “In the circumstances as told to us by Mr Cordell he is...”
or “...isn’t covered.” If the Crown then say, “Well, what he’s telling them
is a load of porky pies” then you have a case.
7
224,
MR POTTINGER: Yes.
THE RECORDER: But without knowing the first part
MR POTTINGER: Well, I’ve not seen anything and I — because I know the officer rang the
company and said he’s — he’s using it for work but — but clearly the —
touting for work or whatever. I don’t know what the — what the position
is as far as that’s concerned. That’s -- a matter for the defence to prove and
at the moment they
MR KENNEDY: Well, I’m getting slightly lost here and it’s probably my fault. My
understanding of this case is this, that he has an insurance policy for that
vehicle. It wouldn’t cover him if he were working. The Crown say that he
was working.
They’re — they’re about to call evidence to say so. His -- he says he
wasn’t. He says that he was going to see somebody about future work, and
I don’t — as I understand it, I don’t think the Crown suggest that if his
position is correct or cannot be disproven that they — that his insurance
was invalid.
THE RECORDER: That’s -- the point.
MR POTTINGER: Yes.
THE RECORDER: Are the — are the Crown taking that stance or not? Or are you saying,
irrespective of what he says about it on that date now, and the Crown have
the advantage of hearing what he said about it, presumably, at the court
below, if your position is “We say, irrespective of what he said, he wasn’t
insured” then we need to sort that out. If you say — if you accept his
version of events, “We accept he was insured” then we can bat on. Or we
can bat on anyway.
MR POTTINGER: Yes.
THE RECORDER: But the point about it is all I’m trying to do is pre-empty
MR POTTINGER: Yes.
THE RECORDER: a situation where we suddenly have to start making enquiries from an
insurance company. But all we’re doing in fact is chewing the breeze and
wasting time.
MR POTTINGER:
THE RECORDER: Yes.
MR POTTINGER: So, let’s get on with it.