Day 205 - 17 Jan 96 - Page 45
1 MR. JUSTICE BELL: It is obviously an advantage if all the
2 parties and I as well have an abstract in the same form
3 which includes any amendments which have been allowed.
4
5 MR. RAMPTON: Brazil should be in your Lordship's, it is in ours
6 on page 3 of tab 1.
7
8 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Just pause a moment.
9
10 MR. RAMPTON: No, we have not done it for everything, that is
11 quite true, but Brazil is in there, in this copy. I do not
12 believe the latest, one might call, child labour citations
13 have been included yet; we will do that. Stick them on the
14 end, I guess, is the best way of doing that.
15
16 MR. JUSTICE BELL: In particular C on page 3 ......
17
18 MR. RAMPTON: That is the one your Lordship gave leave for.
19
20 MS. STEEL: I only wanted to say that from the fact that the
21 Plaintiffs are updating this, it appears that they probably
22 got it on computer on disk or could maybe copy it on to a
23 disk which would save us typing in the whole pleadings.
24 Then if the same thing happens again, if they could let us
25 have the disk, we can update it and provide copies to the
26 court rather than the Plaintiffs doing it. That is all.
27
28 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes, I think you are right. It is there.
29 I thought there were some words as well relating to, I do
30 not know where I got them from, suppliers in Argentina and
31 Switzerland, but I will cross that out.
32
33 MR. RAMPTON: No, they were not allowed, my Lord.
34
35 MR. JUSTICE BELL: They were taken out.
36
37 MR. RAMPTON: I will look back in your Lordship's Brazilian
38 ruling.
39
40 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I have the Brazilian beef one then, but what
41 I do not think I have got -- again I may be mistaken -- is
42 the addition of the matters in relation to alleged
43 violation of child labour laws.
44
45 MR. RAMPTON: Your Lordship has not got those and also some of
46 it is about food poisoning as well, to be added.
47
48 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes. Mr. Morris, are you considering
49 applying for leave to make an amendment on the back if it
50 goes in of what Mr. Stein told the Congressional
51 Committee?
52
53 MR. MORRIS: I do not think we would need to because we have a
54 statement, even though it is of the Plaintiffs' witness,
55 and the Civil Evidence Act orders stands, then his evidence
56 will stand. So, unless the Plaintiffs call someone to
57 rebut his evidence, which they -- well, you know, so I do
58 not think we would need to.
59
60 MR. RAMPTON: My Lord, I am very unhappy about that because I
