Day 149 - 06 Jul 95 - Page 22
1 effect, an application by the Defendants to be allowed to
2 give evidence to explain the headings in the leaflet, which
3 is, in effect of course evidence of their meaning.
4 Mr. Morris said -- and it is not quite verbatim, as I have
5 not got the transcript; it is my own note -- the headings
6 are not part of the text, and it is the text that matters.
7
8 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I am not concerned with that, because I am
9 sure you are right about not calling evidence as to what a
10 meaning is. I am not blind; I can see that the "Mc" is
11 written all the way through McDonald's trademark, all the
12 way along the top.
13
14 MR. RAMPTON: I was only going to add that, in relation to their
15 application (which is in the future) about nutrition, not
16 only should they read your Lordship's ruling and show it to
17 any legal adviser they have on the amendment; they should
18 also, of course, prompt the legal adviser to read
19 The Chancellor and News Group (1995 2 WLR 450).
20
21 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Can I have the reference again?
22
23 MR. RAMPTON: 1995 2 WLR 450.
24
25 My Lord, the next one I wrote down was Mr. Secret. I have
26 told your Lordship that I do not object to his giving
27 evidence in the slightest.
28
29 The next after that was Gary Davies. My Lord, the pleading
30 relating to him is number 67 in tab 7. I invite
31 your Lordship to look at that.
32
33 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes.
34
35 MR. RAMPTON: Page 26, my Lord. There is no witness statement
36 on the Defendants' side, of course, from Mr. Gary Davies.
37 That is all there is. Mrs. Brinley-Codd has sworn that
38 there are no documents relating to that allegation.
39 Mr. Nicholson has twice sworn it: once in an affidavit on
40 discovery, and once in answer to interrogatories. The
41 matter to which he referred in evidence about Mr. Davies'
42 dismissal, a report, was of course nothing to do with what
43 is pleaded at all. It was to do with what your Lordship
44 may remember was a faintly comical reason for his
45 dismissal, which was that he owned to up having defecated
46 in the root beer tank.
47
48 MR. JUSTICE BELL: What I thought was being said was that the
49 suggestion was that that report might have referred to
50 whether Gary Davies' original complaint was that he had
51 been put to working 90 hours a week. There might well be
52 in the report something which said whether that was so or
53 not. If that is so, someone ought to look at the report,
54 ought they not, to see whether it does have anything which
55 is relevant to article number 67.
56
57 MR. RAMPTON: If they already have not, and if it still exists,
58 then I quite agree, yes.
59
60 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I understand your point. If all the report
