Page 128 - 5. 2015 New 26-05-21 No Table

4
220,
MR Mm.
KENNEDY:
THE If you’d like to hand it to the clerk, maybe she’d be
RECORDER: good enough to copy it for us and bring it through to
us. We’ll rise until you’ve sorted it out.
MR Yes.
POTTINGER:
MR I’ve got spare copies so
KENNEDY:
THE Oh, thank you. That’s even better. Good. Thank you
RECORDER: very much. Let us know as soon as you’re ready.
MR Yes.
POTTINGER: (There followed a short adjournment)
THE How are you doing, Mr Pottinger?
RECORDER:
MR Your Honour, I think gut-feeling is the right feeling so
POTTINGER: -- we didn’t find a case directly on point but I think
just looking at it very carefully and standing back,
because the use has to be proved then it’s the
THE Yes.
RECORDER:
MR And that’s the fairest way of dealing with it in any
POTTINGER: event.
THE So, the issue as far as the Crown is concerned is
RECORDER: whether or not he was working at the time?
Is that it?
MR Yes.
POTTINGER:
THE Because
RECORDER:
MR Or whether he was -- well, whether he was using the
POTTINGER: vehicle for work purposes.
THE Yes. What concerns me is — is whether or not we in
RECORDER: any event have enough information. Because this is
merely the certificate of motor insurance. There should
be a schedule of motor insurance. Is that available?
The actual policy. Because it is the experience of those
on the Bench that on occasions it is very difficult to
ascertain the point that’s being made here and that the
policy itself may have a different specification to that
set out on the certificate. In other
5
221,
THE words, if KGM were asked “In the circumstances that
RECORDER: we, the defence, put before you, were this man
insured?”