The motion itself was a written motion. The Prosecution received it late afternoon, the day before we were called upon to respond orally in court. We never filed a written response.
Secondly, your Honour, this is a matter of urgency. It arises directly from the Defence written motion for extension of time and as it is a matter of urgency we believe it is within the Court's discretion to allow it to proceed. It is a matter not only of urgency, it's not a frivolous matter, it is a matter of considerable consequence, in the Prosecution's view, and the longer that we wait for it the longer it will take for disposition. Now, we can file it within probably three hours, but we see this is a technical issue that really should be overcome by the urgency of the motion that we will be making and the significance of the matters that are raised.
We do not seek also - we understand fully the decision that was made yesterday. Contrary to Defence counsel's assertions, this matter was not decided yesterday. What the Court decided yesterday was that it was inappropriate to raise a secondary issue at that time and accordingly did not allow the application. Defence counsel is on notice of exactly what we're going to raise because at 17.05 yesterday we sent an e-mail notifying Defence counsel that we would be seeking to do this and what we would be seeking to request from the Court.