Day 284 - 22 Oct 96 - Page 43


     
     1        going to defend it.  When I say you are reserving your
     2        position, what I am saying is, although if you were counsel
     3        I would expect you to say now, I am not asking you
     4        categorically and finally to say now.  But at some stage
     5        you have to.
     6
     7        I have to say that my own reaction so far -- and I think
     8        I have indicated as such -- is, where what is said could be
     9        treated as a statement of fact, is to treat it as a
    10        statement of fact and see whether it is justified.  Now,
    11        that may not be the right approach, but if you want to say
    12        to me, "No, do not treat that as a statement of fact, treat
    13        it as a comment", I would like you to make clear before you
    14        get to end of your submissions.
    15
    16   MR. RAMPTON:   My Lord, I should, in fairness, add this -- only
    17        because this page or so is one or two that the defendants
    18        will have -- I do believe it to be right, as I just said,
    19        that the Defendant must choose how primarily he is going to
    20        defend the document, the libel; thus, he would say, "I say
    21        that it is comment."  But I think he is entitled to
    22        say: "Nevertheless, if I be wrong about that, in the
    23        opinion of the court, and it is a statement of fact after
    24        all, despite my primary submission, nevertheless, on the
    25        evidence in the case, it is a true statement of fact."
    26
    27   MR JUSTICE BELL:  Yes.  Press on.  (Pause)
    28
    29   MR. MORRIS:   One point I was going to make about the
    30        contributing to a major ecological catastrophe line is that
    31        that implies a continuing damage; it contains within it the
    32        prospect that the damage is ongoing.
    33
    34   MR. JUSTICE BELL:   Yes.
    35
    36   MR. MORRIS:   For example, if as a result of the damage to
    37        forests, people in 40 years' time do not have enough oxygen
    38        to breathe, whatever, it is part of that kind of process of
    39        ongoing damage; and that is the same with the "wrecking the
    40        planet" phrase, that the previous page and that section all
    41        go to justify the fact that the planet is being affected
    42        through deforestation, through imbalance in waste of
    43        resources, through methane generation, CFC production, its
    44        effect on the ozone layer; that it is an ongoing damage,
    45        not just a question of:  well, show us, you know, how many
    46        hundred people have had skin cancer this year from the
    47        destruction of the ozone layer.  I think McDonald's would
    48        have accepted anyway that all those things are serious
    49        global environmental problems that are ongoing.
    50 
    51        The last thing -- well, couple of other things about 
    52        meaning -- and then I will move on, maybe, to McDonald's 
    53        import/export US labelling policies tomorrow, which might
    54        be appropriate -- is that my understanding of what comment
    55        is, is that it has to be honest opinion, one that is
    56        capable of being held by a reasonable person.
    57
    58   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Well, that may be.  I do not know.  You may
    59        be right about that.  You may be going too far, because it
    60        could be held by an honest person even if he actually is

Prev Next Index