Day 294 - 05 Nov 96 - Page 09
1 try and justify the Plaintiffs' meaning.
2
3 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes, I have no problem with that. Since you
4 did very firmly take that view, I was just exploring
5 whether there is a meaning which you accept is defamatory
6 of McDonald's there which you have not yet formulated and
7 I was giving you the opportunity to formulate it now.
8 Yes?
9
10 MR. MORRIS: Yes, I think there is quite a lot in the leaflet
11 that is not defamatory, especially as a lot of it is a
12 general case, not just that McDonald's is the same as other
13 similar companies, but McDonald's is part of a system that
14 is doing X, Y, Z, which does not necessarily mean that each
15 one in that system is doing things that are specifically
16 defamatory and collectively builds up to a big picture. It
17 also means that they are part of a system and it is the
18 system that is doing what is said in the leaflet. So it is
19 one step higher than McDonald's is as bad as everyone else;
20 it is also the step up saying McDonald's is responsible as
21 part of a process that is causing serious problems, whether
22 it is health problems or environmental problems, whatever.
23
24 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I see that. If you say a system is
25 consciously harming other people, and then go on to say Joe
26 Bloggs is part of that system, it seems to me that is
27 defamatory of Joe Bloggs, anyway. You follow your own
28 line.
29
30 I was anxious that I should ask you, and I will in respect
31 of the other heads which have to come, save nutrition where
32 I have decided what the meaning is, whether there is any
33 meaning which you wish to formulate apart from the one
34 which you have pleaded, and which, by the way, you say
35 is....
36
37 MR. MORRIS: I was going to come on in more detail to meaning
38 later on.
39
40 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Carry on now.
41
42 MR. MORRIS: I am not prepared fully.
43
44 MS. STEEL: Can I just say about the consciously harming bit?
45 The point you make might be slightly different where it is
46 a conscious act but is not one that sets out to harm,
47 whereas ----
48
49 MR. JUSTICE BELL: No, I was only using those words for the
50 purpose of my illustrating about a system. It does not
51 have to be conscious harm, an allegation of consciously
52 harming, necessarily. That was just for the sake of an
53 illustration that I do not think you are arguing. It would
54 not be any defence to say there is this pernicious system
55 in practice. It would not be any defence to an allegation
56 of libel by a particular company that it was not
57 specifically mentioned there if the whole context of what
58 was written indicated that it was said that company was
59 part of the system.
60
