Dear Sir PROFESSOR LIPSTADT We refer to your fax of 19 April 1999.
Responding to point 2 of your letter regarding the
videos. As you know, video 223 is a copy video of two
programmes, Dispatches and This Week, broadcast on
27 and 28 November 1991 respectively. Videos 226
and 227 are "rushes" of the programme This
Week. (In your list of videos which you have disclosed
under your Third List of Documents, video number
213, although labelled April 1994, is a copy
recording of the same Dispatches programme.
However, you do not, so far as we are aware, have a
recording of the programme This Week or the
"rushes".) The videos numbered 223, 226 and 227 were sent
to you inadvertently. They comprise part of
privileged communications between ourselves and
third parties, for the purposes of advising our
client on and preparing her defence. The videos
have never actually been in Professor Lipstadt's
possession, nor has she seen them. The position as
stated in her Affidavit sworn on 20 January 1999 is
correct. Since the litigation began, we have collected
numerous documents from third parties for the
purposes of this litigation and in particular to
assist experts in the preparation of their reports.
These documents are covered in Schedule I part 2 of
our client's Lists of Documents. The videos
numbered 223, 226 and 227 are examples of such
documents. Privilege in the videos has not been
waived. However, it is likely that we will be disclosing
the videos with our expert reports and thereby then
waving privilege in relation to them. Given this,
(a) we repeat our request that you return the
videos forthwith and (b) we will thereupon copy
them for you and provide you with a set. Accordingly, your Summons now has no further
purpose and we trust you will now vacate it. Yours faithfully MISHCON DE REYA | 
write to David Irving