Day 053 - 22 Nov 94 - Page 46
1 were concerned, it was what was pleaded and it was just any
2 form of link; also that it was the nutritional content as
3 opposed to the specific meals. So, perhaps if you could
4 just bear that in mind, that basically anywhere where
5 Mr. Rampton has asserted that we were aware of what they
6 are trying to amend their case to now from the word go, we
7 both totally and utterly dispute. If you could bear that
8 in mind; that saves me going through -----
9
10 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I will. What I have to do is look at the
11 whole of what is before me. I will bear in mind what you
12 said, that you did not understand that, but then I have to
13 look at what is said. Maybe I will accept what you say,
14 maybe I will not, and I have to look and see whether
15 I think it has made any difference to the conduct of the
16 case so far.
17
18 If you think there are parts of the transcript which you
19 actually have in mind now which, by the same token, as
20 Mr. Rampton says, because you asked this question, he would
21 ask me to conclude that you did realise "cause" was an
22 issue, that there is some quote there which makes it clear,
23 or might indicate, that you did not realise "cause" was an
24 issue, then direct me to it, either just by giving me the
25 references which I will read through as I read through this
26 morning the list of references to Dr. Arnott's
27 evidence-in-chief and cross-examination.
28
29 I take the point that you think whether there is any kind
30 of link is an issue, but that does not mean to say that you
31 did not appreciate that "cause" was in the arena as well.
32 So, if there is a particular reference somewhere which you
33 say makes it clear that, "not only did we think non-causal
34 link was an issue, we positively did not think that causal
35 link was an issue", then direct me to it.
36
37 MS. STEEL: I think you are misunderstanding what our position
38 is. It is not our position that "cause" was not in the
39 arena; what the difference is is that if the issue was
40 "link" (which we contend that it was) when a witness had
41 admitted a link, we did not need to go any further; whereas
42 if the issue was "cause" but the witness admitted a link,
43 we would have gone a lot further in cross-examining them as
44 to what they meant by "link", and just drawing out as much
45 evidence as possible on what they thought about "cause".
46 So, it is not that "cause" was not any part of it; it is
47 just that we did not go as far as we would have done
48 had "cause" been the issue.
49
50 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I think we are beginning to go back over old
51 ground.
52
53 MS. STEEL: The problem is that, I mean, with respect, it seems
54 obvious to us, but from what you say it does not appear as
55 though you are accepting .....
56
57 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I am going to go away and think about it.
58 I do not accept things just because you say them any more
59 than I accept things just because Mr. Rampton says them.
60 I go away and think about all the factors which I think may
