I don’t know what it is, but I do know that points of law must be discussed privately to avoid speculation and consideration of things that are ruled inadmissible.
For example, if JR named who signed off the NHS Fife document, which I believe was requested yesterday, then those people might be targeted by the public.
Also if something was ruled not admissible, but was discussed in open court, then people might say, but what about that document that said the thing, when the thing was not relevant to the case.
As an example, when KS’ email to the 20 consultants was found, it’s likely NC asked the Judge if she could admit it. The Judge has said yes, because it’s relevant. But if the Judge had said no in open court, we would be shouting show us the email to 20 consultants. No one would have visibility of the document because it wasn’t disclosed, and there would be speculation, which may affect witnesses and/or the judgment. Fortunately in that case the document was admitted into evidence.
Sometimes even mentioning that such a document exists can be enough to create speculation, so the public are not informed of what was discussed. Better that we speculate about the subject discussion than we speculate about the point they were arguing.