SECOND WITNESS STATEMENT OF
EDMUND PATRICK JORDAN

I, Edmund Patrick Jordan of Silverstone, Northamptonshire, NN12 8TJ will say:

1. I am the same Edmund Patrick Jordan who signed a witness statement in this matter on 19 December 2002. I make this witness statement in reply to the evidence served on behalf of the defendant in this matter. I have dealt only with what I consider to be the most important issues.

Silverstone meeting - 6 February 2001

2. I may have said that I thought that Deutsche Post was contractually entitled to "yellow and black livery". If I did I was mistaken (David Haines - paragraph 102). However, it was agreed at the meeting that Ian Phillips would send details of Jordan's contractual obligations to Vodafone which he did.

3. It is absolutely incorrect that David Haines said in relation to Gallaher "If you need to sign it, sign it, don't let us stop you. Do whatever you have got to do". He made it quite clear that Vodafone did not want any association with tobacco.

Dusseldorf - 9 March 2001

4. At this meeting David Haines said that Vodafone had a lot to learn but he went on to say that they had to learn it quickly. That was why David Haines said he had recruited Peter Harris from Coca Cola as he had previous F1 experience and retained KSDP Brown, a top agency.

Allegations about my conduct

5. I did telephone David Haines from the Australian Grand Prix in Melbourne (paragraph 191(b)). If "a little bit worse for wear" is intended to imply that I was intoxicated it is an untrue statement. If David Haines was having lunch in London it would have been midnight in Australia. I would, as it is my normal practice, have telephoned on a mobile phone. I had only met David Haines twice. It is possible, I suppose, that given all these circumstances that he misjudged my condition.

6. When I spoke to David Haines on 22 March 2001 (paragraph 192) I was probably more excited than normal and I can be exuberant. That was because I had just been told by Charles Perring to expect good news and that Ian Phillips and I should wait for David Haines to call.

7. At the meeting at the Pelham Hotel on 23 April 2001 (paragraph 265 - David Haines) which Joe Kieser had asked me to attend without giving a reason, I was certainly neither rude nor ranting and raving (Peter Harris - paragraph 152). I was irritated that David Haines was again an hour late and remonstrated "Is this your way of doing business" as his lateness delayed me for a later meeting. David Haines, Peter Harris, Joe Kieser and Peter Dart were at the hotel for a dinner. I only stayed for a short time. I raised Ferrari as indeed I had at our first meeting but I was given the clear impression that the deal would go to Jordan. Joe Kieser came out of the hotel with me and said words to the effect "Trust me, I have this under control, everything is fine and on track" and "no one else can deliver what we need, just have faith you are the only ones".

8. It is correct that I complained to Peter Harris at the meeting at the Pelham Hotel on 23 April 2001 that MasterCard's letter had not been replied to by Vodafone as promised by David Haines. This was in the context of Vodafone telling me that the deal was still going ahead but not returning Jordan's phone calls or replying to sponsors' letters.

9. I did not say to David Haines (paragraph 209) that I would not use my contacts to swing this deal behind his back. David Haines brought up my contacts during a conversation. He said "This is my deal - you've got it, you do not need to keep phoning your people".

Monaco

10. It is not correct that I did not return David Haines' telephone calls during the week before Monaco (paragraph 283). At all times I carry my mobile telephone and I am meticulous about answering calls. That is simply part of the way I conduct business, always accessible and available.

11. I did not tell David Haines in Monaco that I was in trouble and it was my fault for "opening my big mouth". David Haines and Peter Harris were extremely embarrassed and contrite at the meeting and there was some tension between them. They said that Vodafone would make it up to us.

Phillip Morris

12. Peter Harris does not say what answer John Hogan gave to the question put at the meeting at Lausanne ie. whether Philip Morris would be happy for Vodafone to come on board.

13. However John Hogan told Ian Phillips and myself during a conversation at the 2001 Belgian Grand Prix that Philip Morris was deeply unimpressed with Vodafone at that point suggesting they were "mad" to think Phillip Morris may be prepared to give up title or release any of the space on the car over which they had rights.

Peter Harris

14. Peter Harris implies in paragraph 112 of his witness statement that I accepted the Vodafone letter of 26 March 2001. This is incorrect. Peter Harris told me to ignore the letter.

Joe Kieser

15. Joe Kieser did not tell us at the termination of the meeting on 14 February 2001 that he did not think Vodafone would consider Jordan's proposal as viable or that the cost was still too high (Joe Kieser - paragraph 5a). He said quite the opposite. The initial cost was high because it included Brown's commission on top of the sponsorship fee at the request of the team. At the meeting on 14 February Joe Kieser told us the maximum figure to put in the proposal was $150 million because this was Vodafone's budget but it was a sum it would accept if put to them which Joe Kieser said he would do. This left aside performance bonuses which he said could come from a separate budget. It was agreed that Brown would not get commission on this sum but receive a payment from Vodafone. After the agreement with Vodafone was reached, Brown asked Jordan for a branding contract from Jordan with fees of £1m as a reward for its help in reaching the agreement.

Statement of Truth

I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true.

Signed: Edmund Patrick Jordan