Page 126 - 5. 2015 New 26-05-21 No Table

MR Archbold is silent on the point. I was just reconsidering
POTTINGER: matters. I don’t know if — I really think it should be
established before we start just by looking at a court
copy of Wilkinson although the difficulty being — or
sometimes Blackstone is clearer than others. But I
think it’s something that really needs to just be checked
before we start because
THE I agree. Because if you can’t prove it
RECORDER:
MR Well, the Crown have — we have evidence that we say
POTTINGER: shows he was working at the time.
2
218,
THE Working?
RECORDER:
MR The defendant will say other -- but who’s — who’s got
POTTINGER: to prove it and to what standard.

THE I understand. Exactly.
RECORDER:
MR The – I mean, it’s — it’s clear that the Crown say he
POTTINGER: was in work B clothes with a friend, covered in paint.
THE Yes.
RECORDER:
MR On a weekday afternoon. And he was -- gives some
POTTINGER: kind of explanation.
THE So, if I drove home in my robes that might indicate
RECORDER: that I was working instead of commuting?
MR If — well, that’s the issue. Because there -- there is no
POTTINGER: dispute that there was in policy — in force a valid
policy.
THE Has -- anyone got this policy?
RECORDER:
MR There’s some correspondence which has been
POTTINGER: obtained, yes. The officer at the time made enquiries
with the insurance company.
THE Okay.
RECORDER:
MR But whether it covers the use -- and I --1 do also have
POTTINGER: recollections that — I just want to see if I can find a
reference because I
THE Do you? Well, I think — I think you need to find
RECORDER:
MR I think there are cases covering where there’s a clause
POTTINGER: in the policy and what — what exactly offence, if
anything, committed.
THE Yes.
RECORDER: