Day 158 - 19 Jul 95 - Page 38


     
     1        higher, and given that the contravention was sanctioned by
     2        the President of the McDonald's in the UK and the edict was
     3        issued at the highest level of the Corporation, I think it
     4        is extremely reasonable to suppose that other companies
     5        within the McDonald's system were ignoring edicts when it
     6        suited them for commercial purposes.
     7
     8   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Yes, it is edicts in relation to rain forest
     9        beef, is it not, not just generally?
    10
    11   MS. STEEL:  Yes.
    12
    13   MR. MORRIS:  Oh, yes.  Sorry, I think we should make that clear;
    14        that is the aim of it.  But it is not just edicts we are
    15        concerned with; it is the effect, we would say, of that
    16        they had no policy up to 1989, and they have admitted they
    17        had no written policy which would have been sent to
    18        suppliers, and that at least up to 1989 it is arguable
    19        whether even, as I think Mr. Walker -- I could take you to
    20        the reference if I had time.
    21
    22   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Why do you say there was no policy up to
    23        1989?
    24
    25   MR. MORRIS:  I think it was accepted -- I can find it if
    26        necessary -- Mr. Walker was not even aware that there was a
    27        policy until he got the edict.
    28
    29   MR. RAMPTON:  That was in 1983.
    30
    31   MR. MORRIS:  Sorry, that was in 1983, but McDonald's have
    32        accepted that there was no written policy sent to suppliers
    33        until whenever their corporate policy on ex-rainforest land
    34        was brought in.
    35
    36   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Have you the reference to that in mind?
    37
    38   MR. RAMPTON:  My Lord, I think my recollection is that there was
    39        no specific rain forest requirement in the specification
    40        until 1989.  I will check obviously later on in the case to
    41        see if that is right.  I think that is right.  What, of
    42        course, there has been ever since 1983, at least, is in the
    43        United States specification a requirement that the beef
    44        must be slaughtered and inspected under the USDA.
    45
    46   MR. MORRIS:  On top of that, considering that the first sentence
    47        which has been accepted as a reasonable belief, that they
    48        do not have any coherent or consistent policy  -----
    49
    50   MR. RAMPTON:  I do not regard it as a reasonable belief. 
    51        I regard it as an adequate pleading which I do not object 
    52        to at this stage.  Whether it has any weight or force is 
    53        quite another matter.
    54
    55   MR. MORRIS:  I would say it is already proven, but that is
    56        another matter.
    57
    58   MR. RAMPTON:  Yes, it is entirely another matter.
    59
    60   MR. MORRIS:  All those things considered, it is an absolute

Prev Next Index