October 2025: the defendant’s rebuttal to the claimant’s reply

What is in the file

The Unanswered Record has examined all 19 pages in this supplied PDF copy. Page references below refer to that copy.

This 19-page rebuttal concerns the hearing identified as 14 October 2025. Mr J identifies it as a submission filed with the court under a statement of truth. The Unanswered Record has examined the supplied copy. It records the defendant’s argument; it is not a judgment or the claimant’s reply.

The passages relevant to the email dispute

• Page 5, section B(2): the defendant refers to “an admission contained within his own Reply”. The claimant’s Reply is not reproduced in this document.
• Page 7, section B(6): the submission challenges the self-forwarded correspondence and alleges that a reconstructed copy was verified under a statement of truth. It requests native messages, full headers and the documents supporting the claimed BH68 position.
• Page 17: in a paragraph identifying Luke Cornwell of Seldons LLP, the submission alleges that he “has now admitted in writing to editing and re-forwarding email correspondence after the fact”.
• Page 18: the submission challenges what it describes as a later redaction explanation and alleges that the change was not merely a clerical error.

What this adds to the reporting

The editing and redaction challenge appears in the October 2025 submission itself. It is not solely an allegation recounted to this publication in September 2026. The original explanation and version history are the records against which that challenge can be tested.

Attribution and timing

The admission is described by the defendant, not reproduced in Mr Cornwell’s own words. Pages 7, 15, 17 and 18 refer to submission, service and verification in different ways; they do not supply a complete dated sequence. The precise sequence remains attributed to Mr J pending comparison with the original reply and filed versions.

The supplied copy contains handwritten signatures, but does not display a statement-of-truth declaration for this rebuttal. Filing under such a declaration is Mr J’s account. The legal conclusions and allegations in the submission are the defendant’s position, not findings adopted by this publication.

Publication status

The original PDF is retained outside this website. This source note summarises the supplied copy and does not replace the document itself. A publication copy has not yet been prepared.