Day 164 - 26 Sep 95 - Page 30


     
     1        knowledge of French and the translation, but what it looks
     2        to me that what it is effectively saying is that
     3        proceedings were taken against -- I think raison examen is
     4        part of their form of judicial enquiry by a magistrate in
     5        France, though I may be quite wrong about that -- 12
     6        Restaurant Managers, directeurs de restaurant, and
     7        personnel of McDonald's in the Lyons region.  But the
     8        witness statements you are concerned with seem to me they
     9        are saying were given to the Gendarmerie and the official
    10        body, PV of the Inspectorate at Work, whatever that is.
    11
    12   MR. MORRIS:  Yes, that is what I am saying.  They were given to
    13        the investigation, not necessarily to McDonald's, but those
    14        would be in the hands of their legal representatives.
    15
    16   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Why do you say that?
    17
    18   MR. MORRIS:  I believe they would be.  Maybe that it is possible
    19        that they would not be given to both sides, but I believe
    20        they would be.  I think that McDonald's should hand them
    21        over if they do have possession, power or control over
    22        those witness statements, because that will help the court
    23        in evaluating the truth of what our pleading is saying.  If
    24        they are not in their possession, power or control, then it
    25        becomes an academic application.  The application still
    26        stands if they are in their possession, power or control.
    27        The problem for our witnesses is it is not in their
    28        possession, power or control because they are not, as
    29        individuals, part of the action.  Would that be a good time
    30        to stop?
    31
    32   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Yes, I think it would be.  2 o'clock.
    33
    34                        (Luncheon Adjournment)
    35
    36   MR. MORRIS:  I was just going to make a small comment about the
    37        Towers and Perrin report in response to what Mr. Rampton
    38        said, that I was informed that they would have kept the
    39        report.  The only dispute was whether it was in warm or
    40        cold storage; cold storage being more difficult to locate.
    41        For some reason, I just cannot get organised on this
    42        discovery application.  I am just trying to check your
    43        list.
    44
    45   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  The ones on my list which you have not
    46        touched on so far are the Bath store documents and the
    47        Enquiry Agents' full notes and any response to the HSE
    48        investigation unit's report.
    49
    50   MR. MORRIS:  I do not really see what we can say about the HSE 
    51        one. 
    52 
    53   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  No.  The information which has consistently
    54        come is that it was what you got from Ms. Barnes which was
    55        the totality of it, that there was no other response.
    56
    57   MR. MORRIS:  It was a one sheet of paper recently disclosed and
    58        they said they sent no covering letter.  I do not see what
    59        else we can say about that really.  It cannot have no
    60        covering letter because it does not actually say who it is

Prev Next Index