Day 195 - 04 Dec 95 - Page 54
1 at the end of the day, when I come to make decisions about
2 this case, I have to pay attention to the evidence and only
3 to the evidence and the evidence which is admissible on
4 matters.
5
6 There are two reasons for me to raise it at this stage.
7 The first is I do not want you to brush the matter aside
8 and say that what Mr. Rampton has said is nonsense or, if
9 he is challenging it, he has to prove that it was not said
10 with McDonald's authority. That is the first point.
11
12 The second point is it is important to raise it while
13 Mr. Alimi is in the witness box in case you think you can
14 take some advantage of him being here by asking some
15 question which will strengthen your point. It may well be
16 that you cannot because you have asked Mr. Alimi and he
17 said: "Well, I cannot remember. It went on all the time
18 and I cannot remember now who said it". But I do not want
19 you to be so confident you are right on the legal argument
20 that you let the opportunity slip. Do you understand?
21
22 MR. MORRIS: I understand that. Can I also make another point?
23 You may think -- it is another shot over the bows, if you
24 like, before we bring our case in response to Mr. Rampton
25 -- actually the Public Relations Officer is probably the
26 least person able to give the truth about the real policy
27 of a company because, obviously, they are trained to put
28 over the official party line.
29
30 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Just pause there, because whether or not that
31 is a good point, the point Mr. Rampton was making is that
32 if someone rings up Head Office and says: "I want to talk
33 to someone about fried eggs for breakfast", or something
34 like that, and after a pause someone comes on to the phone
35 and says: "I am a member of McDonald's personal Public
36 Relations Department", then I am not going to have very
37 much trouble deciding that that person on that occasion has
38 authority to speak. Do you understand?
39
40 MR. MORRIS: Yes, but whether they actually say the truth is
41 another question.
42
43 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I know, but I am not concerned -- I am
44 concerned with the truth at the end, but the point I am
45 putting to you, I am not concerned with what is true and
46 not true or what I should attach weight to or not attach
47 weight to. I am concerned with the fundamental question of
48 whether the evidence is admissible against McDonald's at
49 all.
50
51 MS. STEEL: Just one kind of preliminary point, and I think it
52 did come up in one of those cases referred to by
53 Mr. Rampton, although I have not read them in detail yet.
54 Say, for example, a First Assistant or a Second Assistant
55 is given the authority by the Company to run the shift and,
56 therefore, he or she is acting on behalf of the Company,
57 and so which they say to the crew during that shift is on
58 behalf of the Company, because of the position of authority
59 that they have been put in to, provided that it is relevant
60 to the working practices.
