Subscribe to Search results

When preparatory work was undertaken in anticipation of Hepatitis C litigation, Anita James did not think to look for or find the HIV litigation files. She believed that they were held by Ronald Powell in the Solicitor's Division.

Published on:

The Department of Health was vulnerable between 1989 and 1991 as highlighted by Anita James.

Published on:

During her oral evidence to the Inquiry, Anita James accepted that with hindsight, the discovery list for the HIV litigation should have been gone through in full.

Published on:

Anita James did not recall raising any concerns when she received a minute mentioning the possible destruction of important policy files.

Published on:

During her oral evidence to the Inquiry, Anita James acknowledged that steps should have been taken to ensure no further files were destroyed after GEB/1 volume 4 had been destroyed.

Published on:

Anita James did not take any steps to address the information she had received regarding the shredding of Dr Metters' papers as she did not want "to make a fuss".

Published on:

By January 2000, Anita James had not yet told the solicitors acting for the claimants that files were missing.

Published on:

Anita James visited Dr Metter's office in the early 1990s and observed that the ACVSB minutes were in his office.

Published on:

During her oral evidence to the Inquiry, Anita James suggested that staff members did not understand the "significance" of the files they were handling during the 1990s and did not give any thought to the possibility of litigation when undertaking document retention and destruction.

Published on:

Anita James did not recall very much about 1995 or 1996, including why she did not ask Dr Rejman to send over all the files in his possession.

Published on:

Anita James was satisfied that she had provided all relevant documents to Counsel when seeking advice, but does not recall why she was satisfied.

Published on:

During her oral evidence to the Inquiry, Anita James stated that she had not retrieved the HIV litigation files sitting in the Solicitor's Division earlier because she "knew they were there" but was busy and "never thought to look at them".

Published on:

Anita James did not recall receiving reports sent to her by Dr Rejman in June 1995, nor how they came to be mislaid.

Published on:

During her oral evidence to the Inquiry, Anita James stated that she had no recollection of what happened to the publications listed and attached to the main statement of claim in the HIV litigation.

Published on:

During her oral evidence to the Inquiry, Anita James stated that she did not know why Dr Metters had not been approached for his files much earlier and at the time the GEB/1 files were identified as missing.

Published on:

Anita James was copied into a message suggesting that the Solicitor's Division held a copy of some ACVSB files. However, she did not remember what she did about it, and said that she did not authorise a thorough search of the documents at that stage.

Published on:

During her oral evidence, Anita James was of the view that an earlier systematic assessment would not have helped locate more of the missing documents due to the passage of time and people's memories fading.

Published on:

Dr Rejman informed Anita James that GEB/1 Volume 4 was missing.

Published on:

During her oral evidence to the Inquiry, Anita James stated that she was working with Charles Lister to assess where the missing documents were.

Published on:

During her oral evidence to the Inquiry, Anita James conceded that there had been no other similar loss of documentation on other litigation cases at the time.

Published on: