Day 002 - 29 Jun 94 - Page 47
1 third, whether the plaintiffs have proved if something
they have proved is untrue, whether we knew it to be
2 untrue. The fact that we may not prove a particular point
cannot, therefore, mean that we knew it was untrue.
3
The plaintiffs, first, will have to demonstrate that we
4 knew something was untrue, that something is untrue, not
proven. They will have to demonstrate the fact sheet line
5 by line, or whatever, is not true. Then they have to
demonstrate that we know it was untrue in order to succeed
6 on the counterclaim, but they are under an obligation to
do that, and that we did give them an option of
7 apologising and withdrawing the counterclaim.
8 If they are under an obligation as from now, their defence
will be an abuse of procedure that they made if they do
9 not attempt genuinely to justify that defence. They have
no right to put in a defence of justification without
10 attempting to prove it.
11 I think that is the counterclaim. All sorts of leaflets
have been allegedly circulated by the defendants or
12 supporters of the defendants, or whatever, which
McDonald's have put in a big pile. There is no evidence
13 whatsoever that the defendants have circulated any of the
leaflets specified, that any of the people that did
14 circulate these leaflets were agents of the defendants.
So that remains to be seen in the particulars which the
15 plaintiffs will be serving soon, then we will know what
case we have to meet because there is some information in
16 the other leaflets which is not in the fact sheet.
17 There are a lot of things in the fact sheet that are not
in the updated leaflets. This whole area is a very grey
18 area that the plaintiffs are creating which makes
everyone's job more difficult. Here we have the case
19 about a fact sheet, both sides -- well, the obligation on
the defendants to prove the fact sheet. The plaintiffs
20 gradually began to bring in later leaflets which are not
really relevant to the claim. Suddenly, because of their
21 actions, on the eve of trial, we are forced to make a
counterclaim.
22
In defence of that, the plaintiffs disclosed a huge wad of
23 extra leaflets which they say justify their defence
without any particulars whatsoever, so we do not know when
24 they were handed out, where, who by, how they were agents
of the defendants, or whatever. It has really muddied the
25 whole area. We do not know what case we have to answer,
neither does anybody else at this moment, except for the
26 plaintiffs so they have to put it down on paper as soon
possible. That is the counterclaim.
27
I just want to go through some other bits and pieces to
28 finish off. As I have said, this is a fundamental look at
the McDonald's Corporation, about their motivation,
29 profits, their motivation for the things that they do and
their business practice, it is about uniformity,
30 restriction of choice, mass consumerism, specially about
image. The McDonald's Corporation basically is really a
