Update from the Inquiry

The start date of module 1 oral evidence has been put back in the light of the application asking the Inquiry to consider seeking an undertaking from the Attorney General.

On Monday, the panel will hear submissions from Counsel for the bereaved, survivors and resident core participants and from Counsel to the Inquiry on the application. The Chairman has confirmed that the Inquiry will not hear evidence on Tuesday. Whether it will be necessary to put the start of oral evidence back further will depend upon the outcome of the application.

Update from the Inquiry

This update provides information on:

  • Phase 2 hearings
  • Phase 2 timetable
  • Inquiry venue
  • Disclosure figures
  • Core participant numbers
  • Drop-ins and aftermath

Phase 2 hearings

The Inquiry’s Phase 2 hearings begin on Monday 27 January 2020. The hearings will begin with opening statements, followed by an examination into the primary refurbishment of Grenfell Tower (the full list of modules is below).

Update on panel members

Today, the Prime Minister has announced that Benita Mehra will be replacing Professor Nabeel Hamdi as a panel member on the Inquiry. You can view the announcement here.

Chairman to the Inquiry, Sir Martin Moore-Bick, said of the appointment:

“I am pleased to confirm that I agree to Ms Mehra’s appointment as a member of the panel and I look forward to working with her on Phase 2 of the Inquiry.”

Update from the Inquiry

This update provides information on:

  • Accessibility of the Phase 1 report
  • Assessors Update
  • Number of Core Participants
  • Disclosure Update
  • Drop-ins

Phase 1 Report

As of 20 November, the Phase 1 report had been accessed 31,781 times from the website and the executive summary 29,845 times.

Update from the Inquiry

The Chairman regrets that members of the media have obtained the content of the Phase 1 report, or parts of it. The Chairman and the whole Inquiry team are very disappointed that someone has seen fit to disregard the confidential nature of the report during the embargo period. It is equally disappointing that media elected to publish what they would have been aware was subject to strict obligations of confidence.

Share this page: