Day 307 - 27 Nov 96 - Page 17
1 wrong with McDonald's' (referred to in paragraph 3 of the
2 Statement of Claim) contained numerous allegations which
3 were false and defamatory and have, despite these letters,
4 continued to publish or cause to be published or been party
5 to or procured the publication of the said leaflet and
6 other material containing allegations of the same or
7 similar effect and have thereby spread or caused or been
8 party to or procured the spreading of lies."
9
10 The first point on their meaning is that the press releases
11 and the leaflets do not refer to representatives of London
12 Greenpeace; it refers to members. I do not know whether
13 that particularly matters or whether that will make any
14 difference, in effect, but just to note that the word is
15 not used in the press releases.
16
17 The second point is that they have just said that we
18 ignored letters sent by McDonald's solicitors in 1984 and
19 1990. Now, there is absolutely no mention in McDonald's
20 pleaded meaning about the several subsequent letters which
21 are referred to in both of the press releases and in the
22 leaflet that McDonald's issues, and if I just say, in
23 addition to that point, the letter sent in 1990 is not, in
24 fact, mentioned in the leaflet "Why McDonald's is going to
25 court". That leaflet just says: "The leaflet has been
26 distributed worldwide since 1984. Its contents have been
27 repeated in the media stalls and even in a church
28 magazine." Then: "During that period the group has
29 ignored several requests from McDonald's to stop publishing
30 the leaflet."
31
32 So, it is clear from the leaflet that anybody reading that
33 would assume we had ignored several requests which have
34 been sent since 1984, not two single requests, one in 1984
35 and one in 1990. That is true of the "Libel Action
36 Background Briefing" as well, because that refers to 1984
37 and 1990 and refers to several subsequent letters in the
38 intervening period.
39
40 If you just note that the paragraph about "in September
41 1990 McDonald's writing to the five core members of the
42 group", is a separate paragraph to the one about 1984,
43 which refers to the "despite several subsequent letters".
44
45 The other part, then, about the Plaintiffs' pleaded meaning
46 (c) is again the "causing or procuring the publication of
47 the said leaflet", and I have already made the point
48 before, "and other material containing allegations to the
49 same or similar effect." Again, the point is that the
50 whole reference throughout these documents is to the fact
51 sheet which we are being sued over, and it is not about
52 McDonald's trying to stop us distributing other leaflets.
53 The press release is quite specifically referring to the
54 leaflet that is the subject of the action. The same,
55 really... Sorry, a similar point about the "causing or
56 being party to or procuring the spreading of lies" is the
57 same point I made earlier.
58
59 Then on meaning (d): "The Defendants and each of them are
60 deliberately deceiving the public when they know full well
