JOINT COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE, EQUALITY, DEFENCE AND WOMEN’S RIGHTS debate -
Wednesday, 1 Jun 2005

Treaty of Amsterdam: Motion.

Chairman

I welcome the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy McDowell, and his officials to the meeting. The joint committee meets today to consider the following motion:

That Dáil Éireann approves, in accordance with Article 29.4.6° of Bunreacht na hÉireann, the exercise by the State of the option, provided by Article 3 of the Fourth Protocol set out in the Treaty of Amsterdam, to notify the President of the Council of the European Union that it wishes to take part in the adoption and application of the following proposed measures:

proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters,

a copy of which proposed measure was laid before Dáil Éireann on 9 November 2004.

proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a European Small Claims Procedure,

a copy of which proposed measure was laid before Dáil Éireann on 12 April 2005.

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy McDowell)

The matter before the joint committee concerns the exercise by the State of its option to take part in the adoption and application of proposals for a regulation creating a European small claims procedure and a directive on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters. The measures were presented by the European Commission on 23 and 30 March last, respectively. Members will recall that we have three months in respect of the measures, to which the fourth protocol of the Amsterdam Treaty applies, within which to notify the President of the Council of our intention to opt into any discussions from the beginning. As the period will expire shortly, it is essential to seek the approval of both Houses before the summer recess. The approval of both Houses has previously been sought and given on several occasions for the State to exercise the option provided in the fourth protocol in respect of proposals in the area of EU judicial co-operation in civil matters. It is highly desirable that the Houses of the Oireachtas should play a meaningful role in scrutinising measures such as those which are under discussion today. I look forward to hearing the observations of members and to dealing with any queries which might arise. I remind members that officials of my Department appeared before the Joint Committee on Enterprise and Small Business when it was examining the related European Commission Green Paper on an order for payment system and on measures to speed up and simplify small claims litigation in 2003. Recently, officials of my Department attended the Sub-committee on European Scrutiny to discuss Title IV measures in general.

The proposals under discussion should be viewed against the background of the development at EU level of measures geared to enhance judicial co-operation in civil matters. The overriding aim is to make access to justice easier for individual litigants. The access to justice programme is predicated on the fact that in a genuine European area of justice, individuals or businesses should not be prevented or discouraged from exercising their rights by the incompatibility or complexity of legal and administrative systems in the member states. In the conclusions of the 1999 Tampere meeting of the European Council, the Council and Commission were called upon to prepare new legislation on those elements of civil procedure required to facilitate judicial co-operation and enhance access to justice. Extra-judicial procedures such as mediation were specifically included in the list of measures considered to warrant legislative initiative as was the creation of a European small claims procedure. The 2004 Hague programme also identifies the proposals in question as projects to be actively pursued.

A number of measures which link in with the access to justice programme have already been brought to the attention of the Oireachtas and, subsequently, been adopted. Examples include the simplification of procedures for the service of documents within the EU, the creation of a European enforcement order for uncontested claims and the establishment of the civil judicial network. The proposed regulation to create a European small claims procedure provides for a specific procedure to be available in all member states as an optional tool for those who seek a court decision in respect of a small claim which is capable of being specified in terms of a concrete amount. For the purposes of the proposal, a small claim is defined as one which does not exceed an amount of €2,000.

The existing Irish small claims procedure covers amounts up to €1,270, which is the euro equivalent of the pre-changeover sum of £1,000 punts. Our small claims procedure focuses largely on consumer issues, whereas the procedure we consider today has a broader scope in which it is envisaged it will apply to civil and commercial claims generally and need not be consumer-based. The Commission proposal is not intended to replace national procedures such as our own. Instead, the European small claims procedure is envisaged as being an optional tool member states will have to offer to those seeking court decisions of a kind which fall within the scope of the proposal. While the proposal is not currently confined to cross-border cases, its greatest utility is likely to occur where a person resident in one member state needs to obtain a relevant judgment from the courts of another.

The question of how decisions will be enforced in practice has not yet been the subject of any formal Commission proposal. Clearly, however, there is a definite link between the process of getting a decision and having it recognised in another member state and the process of subsequently proceeding, should it be proved necessary, to the practical steps whereby a debt can be recovered.

The proposal for a directive on mediation aims at promoting the use of mediation and establishes certain minimum rules intended to ensure a sound relationship between mediation and judicial proceedings. While the proposal as presented has a very broad scope, in that it applies to all civil and commercial matters without exception, it is confined to the mediation process only and is not intended to apply to processes which are more adjudicatory in nature. Examples of adjudicatory processes include arbitration and ombudsman schemes. The proposal also contains a number of important provisions dealing with the enforceability of mediation settlements, the admissibility of evidence in civil proceedings and the suspension of the limitation period.

Mediation is a tool whose use is becoming more prevalent in Ireland. It is a model of dispute resolution which the Government supports as a means of reducing costs for all parties and as a means of reaching a speedier resolution to difficulties which may arise in the ordinary course of human engagement. By encouraging mediation as a solution to difficulties which might otherwise entail court proceedings, the proposed directive has the potential to benefit commercial and individual litigants. As with the small claims proposal, the mediation proposal as presented is not confined to cross-border cases. Its greatest utility, however, is likely to arise where a dispute between parties to a mediation has cross-border connotations.

EU instruments of the type envisaged in these proposals have the potential be a useful tool for Irish consumers and businesses alike. Having regard to the potential benefits of the proposed instruments for consumers and businesses, and to the fact that we have already opted into other connected proposals, I very much hope the committee will support the proposal that Ireland opt into the discussions on these instruments. I look forward to hearing the comments of members on the matter.

Mediation is a growing phenomenon in dispute resolution. In the United Kingdom, the courts are, in some cases, refusing costs to successful litigants on the basis that they did not opt for mediation, which might have avoided litigation in the first place. This is a very welcome approach by the UK judiciary. The advantage of mediation over arbitration is that, with mediation, it is possible to think of solutions to problems that are not simply available through arbitration which is a substitute for a judicial decision.

A mediator can think outside the box and can arrive at solutions different from those that can be arrived at by a court. For instance, I have witnessed mediations in which arguments between employers and employees have resulted in a proposal radically different from that which a court would make. Such a proposal might include an extension of the person's working life. No court could order that a person's retirement age be postponed but this kind of solution can be made from outside the box by a mediator as a way of getting both sides to realise they have common ground.

These two instruments are the kinds of instruments that represent useful developments of the law. The existence of a set of uniform policies, available to people who might otherwise be nervous about enforcing their rights, particularly in cross-border circumstances, will create across Europe greater confidence regarding small claims and all disputes.

Chairman

Is there an opportunity for Ireland to be an EU centre for arbitration and mediation?

Deputy McDowell

At present, there are a number of such centres in Europe, one of which is the International Chamber of Commerce Court of Arbitration in Paris. The legal profession in Ireland is trying to develop Dublin as a base for mediation and arbitration. We have some advantages, including linguistic and legal advantages. Much international mediation and arbitration takes place in London, for instance, but if expertise is developed here, there is scope for developing Dublin as a centre for this purpose.

In the Civil Liability and Courts Bill, we made provision in statute, for the first time, for a court to refer matters to mediation as an option when a case comes before it. We also made provision for the recognition of various people as competent mediators for the purpose. The Department has approved a number of bodies in recent times as approved mediators for the Courts Service in the context of personal injuries litigation. There is probably more scope for the use of mediation in commercial disputes and disputes involving landlords and tenants, for example. This is where mediation is most likely to make significant improvements.

The Chairman will know from his business background that where a dispute appears as if it is about to result in litigation, one of the questions at the back of a businessman's or businesswoman's mind is whether he or she can afford it. One of their suspicions is that the case is being dragged out in the hope they will be frightened by the costs of litigation. The advantage of mediation is that the parties involved can bring their issues to the mediator relatively inexpensively. The mediators can, as I stated, arrive at solutions that are outside the box, thus avoiding the expense of litigation.

Chairman

Who should take the initiative? Is it the Bar Council, the Department or another body?

Deputy McDowell

A commercial mediation society has already been established in Dublin. I am trying to encourage the professions to develop such institutions but I do not want to confine the process to legal people. I had a man in my clinic some days ago who said he wanted to become involved in mediation. He was asking for my guidance on how he could do so. He was a retired executive of a major multinational. People such as he have a lot to offer. I am not against lawyers but they do not have to have a monopoly on mediation. There may be very good mediation lawyers but they might also be a bit adversarial. Others in society might have a far better, solution-orientated approach.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

I support both proposals enthusiastically. The brief debate today gives us an opportunity to consider what we are doing and the approach we should take. We should aim to ensure, as soon as possible, that mediation becomes the norm in every civil case. It is clear that there are great pressures on our courts. The delays before judgments are made amount to a scandal in many instances. I operate on the principle that justice delayed is justice denied.

I understand the number of judges is very low by comparison to that in other countries. One solution is to appoint more but it would possibly be better to syphon as much pressure as possible from the courts through mediation in addition to appointing a few more. This has great advantages, including that of lowering costs. When I practised as a solicitor I always felt one was serving one's client better by reaching a good, early settlement. Thus, clients kept their money in their pockets and did not have to endure the pressures or stresses associated with court proceedings, nor did they have to expose themselves to the risks that are sometimes associated with them.

We will have to try to develop the mediation system further. A number of people came to see me about this some time ago. There are steps that can be taken to encourage the mediation process. We need more mediators with better training and we need to afford to them more recognition. If we want to establish mediation as the norm, we must operate a system whereby those who do not participate wilfully in a mediation process will suffer penalties and costs. This is where the stick will be associated with the carrot. In European terms, we should very much support the proposal for a directive on mediation in civil and commercial matters.

I am also very supportive of the other proposal regarding the regulation establishing a European small claims procedure. There are a couple of points that should be made about it. The proposal refers to a small claim for an amount not exceeding €2,000. The figure associated with our existing Irish small claims procedure is €1,270, which I presume is the equivalent of £1,000. There is a case for increasing it to €2,000. I recommend that the Government take that step straight away.

I have one small warning regarding enforceability. Let me refer to a recent example. We all draw examples from our clinics although I do not have too many managing directors of multinationals coming into mine. It involved an ordinary hardworking person who fell for a scam which invited him to sign up for a European journal. The agreement was full of small print designed to deceive. Upon investigation, I discovered that this scam was widespread in Europe. The Irish consumer affairs body was helpful in advising me how I might assist this person in a political rather than legal capacity. I am concerned that it may be possible, through a European small claims procedure, to have a judgement made in a court in Verona without allowing the opportunity to mount a defence. In an agreed enforcement arrangement, the sheriff would then have knocked on the door of one of my west Cork constituents. While I am in favour of this proposal in principle, procedures should be in place to guard against this kind of outcome.

Chairman

People sign up for European directories without knowing the implications.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

The small print, upon examination, was horrendous.

Deputy Hoctor

I welcome the Minister and his officials and I support the proposal before us for a directive on mediation. We should recall that good solicitors practised mediation on the steps of the courthouse before that word was fully defined. To give the legal profession its due, this avoided grief and financial difficulties for many people.

I am a strong supporter of mediation and familiar with the methods adopted by the voluntary Nenagh community reparation project, which used the tool of mediation to achieve reparation for the community. The mediation carried out by this project has proven successful in terms of offenders and victims. The Minister is familiar with this project and has heard me discuss it recently. I see a clear role for mediation and mediators in terms of anti-social behaviour orders. Many of the mediators for the Nenagh community reparation project were trained in the mediation centre in Tallaght. I am familiar with the project's work in neighbourhood disputes and other matters. I ask the Minister to investigate the success of the reparation project in Nenagh with a view to providing it with the statutory recognition it deserves.

We are not unaware in Ireland of the merits of mediation. Mediation is not only practised in New Zealand and Australia but formed part of Brehon law. I welcome the directive before us.

Deputy Costello

I welcome both proposals. The appropriate route is to pursue mediation as much as possible. It is difficult to envisage a situation where too much mediation would take place. I also welcome the idea of a small courts process to address small claims. I am glad to see that the mediation process will apply to all civil and commercial matters. It will have widespread application.

I foresee problems involving operations across states. It is easy to organise mediation within a delimited geographical area but it is difficult to implement effectively unless personal relationships are established. Brokers may be able to arrange video conferences or make telephone calls but it is difficult to imagine people travelling to any great extent in order to mediate. Mediation will not take place unless a crisis arises. It would appear an expensive process involving logistical difficulties. Perhaps the Minister will describe how the process might work in practice so that it is meaningful without costing an arm and a leg or ending up in tears.

The small claims court is, in theory, a great initiative but, in reality, it leaves much to be desired. I will follow the practice of others with an example from my constituency clinic. A man bought a door for €400 in Thomas Street. When the door was not delivered, he received an enforcement order from the small claims court. The sheriff visited the seller of the door, who had no doors in stock. The sheriff offered the plaintiff a selection of planks of wood instead of the door but these were not accepted. I spoke with the sheriff, who told me that on numerous occasions doors had been sold from the same premises but, because no mechanism existed for the sheriff to contact anybody else, only what was available could be seized from the premises. The premises in question contained pieces of wood but nothing of real value. No mechanism existed for proper enforcement to ensure that the seller was put out of business. Later, I discovered that the sheriff in south Dublin had dealings with the same seller. Connections were not made between the two sheriffs or amongst small claims courts and no file was kept of the matter. This situation continues to obtain.

The costs and difficulties of enforcement across states may be imagined. We should review the operations of our own small claims courts to ensure that cowboys cannot drive a coach and four through legislation. How is enforcement to be operated on a cross-border basis?

I presume that this matter is optional. For example, somebody in Ireland may opt for either mediation or the small courts while somebody in Poland may not be interested in the process.

Deputy B. Moynihan-Cronin

I support the comments by members on enforcement procedures. We have listened to their various stories. I heard of a furniture removal company in Dublin that sometimes delivers 90% of furniture to a person's house, while keeping some valuable items. It can be up to a fortnight afterwards when the individual realises this. I was following up a situation similar to that of Deputy Costello's. The sheriff went to where the furniture was stored but no one was there. The man I knew did a trace and found that many people had been caught out in the same situation. The removal man is still operating even though there were court orders. The individual who went to the Small Claims Court did not use a solicitor and was not aware that mediation was available. Information leaflets must be made available to those individuals who do not go through solicitors making them aware that mediation is available as an alternative to going to the courts.

Deputy F. McGrath

I welcome the debate on the European small claims procedure and the directive on the mediation of civil and commercial matters. I also welcome the Minister's apparent change of heart. Will he apply this to his political life when he claims that mediation is a tool which is coming more into use in Ireland? He claims it is a model of dispute resolution which the Government supports as a means of reducing costs for all parties and reaching a speedy resolution to difficulties which may arise in the normal course of human engagement. This is a noble statement by the Minister and I hope he applies the same tactics to dealing with issues such as the prisons, the North and policing.

We must listen to the citizens in all debates on EU directives. There is a view, which the main political parties do not take seriously and one which I have argued for the last two years, that EU citizens have concerns about the EU's direction. The recent French referendum has shown this. All types of excuses can be made but people have legitimate and genuine concerns about the EU. People are cheesed off with the arrogance and political snobbery that emerges from those pushing the EU constitution. While there are many positive developments in the EU, people have major concerns about its directions. I find in many quarters that these views are not respected. Our views must be respected. I appeal to every member that when discussions are held on EU regulations, it must be remembered that there is another viewpoint. We are not anti-EU or hostile to international peace. However, we have legitimate and democratic concerns about the direction of the EU. Many of us who are democrats support the idea of respecting the views of all citizens in the different EU member states.

Chairman

I take it the Deputy is in favour of the proposal.

Deputy F. McGrath

Yes.

Senator J. Walsh

I support this initiative on the European small claims procedure. However, it strikes me that the threshold, increased to €2,000, is still on the low side. Can it be revisited in the negotiations? It is important to have effective enforcement of decisions so there is respect for the procedure. I welcome mediation as a mechanism to dispute resolution.

What are the cost implications of mediation? Most contracts have an arbitration clause which is a better mechanism than going through the courts. However, it can be as costly as going to the courts. From having been involved in contracts, I know arbitration can be as costly a mechanism as full litigation. It is important that the mediation process is not consumed by the legal profession and becomes another expensive resolution mechanism. The Minister stated the overriding aim of the development is to make access to justice easier for the individual litigant. I have always argued that one great barrier to accessing justice is the prohibitive costs entailed. I hope the mediation process can be utilised without costing an arm and a leg.

I support Deputy Hoctor's comments on the restorative justice scheme in Nenagh, County Tipperary. The scheme should be rolled out nationwide. Last week, when in a jurisdiction where it is widely used, I noted it was particularly effective with First Nations people, who because of their disadvantaged backgrounds sometimes get into difficulties with the law. It is an effective tool because the elders of the tribe are embarrassed by their own people becoming involved in crime. This is a scheme of which we can make better use.

A complaint I often hear is that the family law system is too adversarial. A mediation mechanism within the system could be examined. The influences brought to bear can have a tremendous impact in the outcome and the route followed. I do not know if this particular proposal can assist in this. If it cannot, we should examine it independently.

Deputy O’Connor

Now that Nenagh has received so many mentions, I can mention Tallaght once or twice. Deputy Finian McGrath's contribution confused me because we have been Deputies for three years with 730 days to go. I am just ticking that matter off.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

There will be more to be ticked off.

Deputy O’Connor

Deputy Jim O'Keeffe is trying to talk us all into a general election. There are 730 days to go so he better calm down.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

Bí ullamh.

Deputy O’Connor

Deputy Jim O'Keeffe and I debated issues relating to this remit on radio last week. The presenter claimed no one in Cork would be listening but many people in Tallaght were. I took the opportunity during the broadcast to praise the work of the Minister and said that he is the one Minister delivering on legislation. I am not trying to be patronising.

Deputy Costello

It may not be patronising but it is flattering.

Deputy O’Connor

If it was not the case, this committee would not be sitting so often. Even Deputy Costello made the point that the Minister has made a large contribution to Government matters.

I am a well known supporter of the mediation concept. I was the founding chairman of Tallaght's Mediation Bureau, now based in Glenshane in west Tallaght. Arising from that initiative, the restorative justice programme was born in Tallaght and is now successful. The Minister recently visited there for the launch of the restorative justice report with Judge McDonnell. The Minister saw on this occasion the importance of the concept of mediation and restorative justice. I strongly support the restorative justice group in Tallaght and, as Deputy Hoctor has kindly said, it has now spread to Nenagh, County Tipperary. It provides a model which must be duplicated as it has worked so well in Tallaght, helping not just those in difficulties. It has also made a major contribution to ensuring that moneys which accrued to the system were then used for community groups. That has been an important mechanism for helping such groups.

I take the point made by Deputy Finian McGrath regarding mediation — though I am sure his tongue was in his cheek — but mediation is always the way to go. As the old Telecom advertisement used to say, it is good to talk. It is better to talk through these issues. As we move towards community policing and the introduction of anti-social behaviour orders, dealing with issues in an upfront manner and talking about them is the way forward.

Views on anti-social behaviour orders are mixed, but they would be welcome in my community, where the problems are no worse than anywhere else. As I pointed out on radio recently, I was born in the south inner city and lived in Crumlin for quite some time. I am now living happily in Tallaght, and representing it. My grandmother was not concerned about serious bank robbers in the United States but had no time for the petty thieves running around Dublin in her time. That situation has not greatly changed. Communities across the country are affected by anti-social behaviour and it is important that we deal with it.

When the committee visited Scotland Yard in London, I made the point that we must be careful not to criminalise young people for no good reason. The Minister knows I am a strong supporter of the Garda diversion projects. I am putting pressure on him, and I have tabled a Dáil question today about the stay-in-school project in Tallaght. It is important that we support these projects, and I know the Minister will be sympathetic.

Deputy Costello

Tallaght will be the world centre for mediation.

Deputy O’Connor

We are proud of what we do in Tallaght. It is important that we continue to tell the Department that the projects involved are worthwhile and should be funded.

Deputy McDowell

I welcome the supportive attitude of all committee members to these two measures. As the committee is aware, before we even opt into the discussion process on these measures, we must get an Oireachtas licence to do so. That is a good idea because it is important that things are not happening in Europe of which the electorates and their representatives are unaware.

Deputy Finian McGrath made the point that we must respect each other's views on Europe. That is true. I refer him to a speech I made when Attorney General, the theme of which was almost exactly the same. Some people claim to be the keeper of the flame where the European project is concerned, with nobody's else's variant on Europe accepted, but we are a broad-church continent. Different people have different concepts of the European Union and cannot all be dragooned into having one view of Europe. I accept that.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

That sounds like an invitation to Deputy McGrath to join the Progressive Democrats.

Deputy O’Connor

He should join some party.

Deputy McDowell

This is the kind of measure which can bring a change of some kind to people's lives, as distinct from theoretical measures which are abstract and tend to alienate public support.

Regarding the small claims procedure, I take the point that one does not want this abused. One does not want people finding judgments registered against them. The small claims procedure with which we are dealing today involves, as a prerequisite, notice to the other side, and even at the end of it allows for a review of the judgment decision. Although it is an accelerated process, and simplified, notice to the other side is a prerequisite to jurisdiction under the scheme, and there is provision in article 16 for those who claim not to have got a fair deal, or to have been prevented from making their case, to have the procedure reviewed.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

When would a review take place? My problem with this relates to the European directories. If, for example, a decision were obtained in Verona in northern Italy, a person in west Cork would not readily have an opportunity to oppose the decision. Would that person be able to question the process in this country?

Deputy McDowell

No. One cannot have a system whereby a court has jurisdiction and makes a decision, with another court somewhere else overturning the decision after hearing another side of the story. The principle of the common space of justice in the European Union is mutual recognition.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

Will the Minister accept that the problem with regard to a small claim is that a man perhaps in west Cork, Tallaght or anywhere else, does not have much opportunity to deal with a case initiated in northern Italy, for example?

Deputy McDowell

I take the point that these directories send out documents which I regard as bogus. They look like invoices. In the accounts departments of most firms it would look as if an order had been placed from above, and the document would seem to be the bill, though in fact the company would have had no contact with the people responsible for the directory. Those people hope that in a certain proportion of claims, perhaps 5%, 2% or 3%, some person will, on a busy afternoon, pay the sum in question, or return a form, imagining the service to be free, and find that he or she has signed on for repeat editions of the directory ad infinitum, or until cancelled.

Deputy J. O’Keeffe

Are all claims to be decided in an accessible court?

Deputy McDowell

Yes, with a jurisdiction clause which makes it very difficult to reverse the process. This is an issue of which we should be mindful. We must be constantly on our guard against scams. A current scam resembles a lottery. One is told one has won a prize and must call a telephone number in order to collect it. In fact it is a means of running up a major phone bill for the person. Such operations should be prohibited, by whatever means, as unfair. I do not know how that is to be done.

Deputy O’Connor

The Minister has two more years to do something.

Deputy McDowell

The small claims procedure does not envisage, at first instance, that the two parties come before a judge. As a written procedure is meant to take place first, so that physical presence is not the norm.

Deputy Costello

Enforcement is the issue.

Deputy McDowell

Yes. Mutual enforcement is the key issue. Regarding mediation, the point has been made that it applies right across the board. There are analogues in criminal justice but here we are dealing purely with civil claims. I strongly support the notion that except where mediation would be simply pointless, and an unnecessary delay, because of both sides knowing exactly what is the issue, there is virtually no circumstance where it is not appropriate for lawyers on either side to alert their clients that mediation should be tried. Family law practitioners are required to inform their clients that mediation is an option. If I could, I would strengthen that provision and follow the English practice of making costs in family law cases greatly contingent on demonstrating to a court why mediation was not adopted by the so-called winning side. The costs of family law litigation can sometimes be catastrophic for a family.

I thank the committee for its supportive attitude on this matter. The next stage will be the negotiating process. If and when a directive or decision arises out of that negotiation process, we will be back to the committee to report it.

Chairman

That concludes our discussion on the subject today.

Deputy Costello

it is back to square one.

Chairman

The Deputy will be able to find a way to make his point. This is a matter that must be solved by the Whips, and not at the committee

Is it agreed that there should be no further debate on the matter by Dáil and Seanad Éireann? Agreed. Is the draft report agreed, subject to the insertion of the Minister's speaking note and details regarding attendance and contributors to the discussion? Agreed.

I thank the Minister and his officials for attending this meeting and we look forward to seeing them at the meeting of the select committee at 5.15 p.m.