Day 309 - 03 Dec 96 - Page 61
1 of all, this is English publication so the mind of the
2 English reader is going to think about whoever it is, as
3 your Lordship says, is running McDonald's in this country,
4 it being an English company, but then there is a lot of
5 material in the later part of this leaflet, particularly in
6 relation to employment, which focuses more on this country
7 than it does overseas.
8
9 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes. The other matter, and I think it is the
10 final one before I look at particular parts of your
11 submissions, and you will be relieved to hear that there
12 are not many of those on economic imperialism and
13 rainforest, but Mr. Morris said that in looking at damage
14 to reputation, or damages, McDonald's have a poor
15 reputation on environment and this is relevant in some
16 ways, and that the first question is, is there any evidence
17 or any basis upon which I could agree that it has such and
18 such a reputation, and if the answer to that is, yes, is it
19 relevant to damages, even if true, if it is the result of
20 people putting around matter which is untrue in fact; if
21 that were so.
22
23 Suppose it had a poor reputation on environment because
24 lots of people thought it was responsible for the
25 destruction of the rainforest, because they had been told
26 it time and time again by various people, and suppose
27 I said, well, there is some evidence that it has an
28 indifferent reputation on that but that is the result of
29 people being told quite wrongly that it has been
30 responsible for the destruction of the rainforest.
31
32 MR. RAMPTON: Again, can I take your Lordship's questions in
33 order? First, there is no evidence. What Mr. Morris says,
34 however many times he said it, is not evidence.
35
36 MR. JUSTICE BELL: No, saying it so does not make it so.
37
38 MR. RAMPTON: The fact that Mr. Morris says it does not make a
39 ha'peth of difference, the law says, since he did not go
40 into the witness box. There would have to be evidence, and
41 I mean by evidence real evidence, not rumour, speculation,
42 that is not allowed. You have to have actual, gritty
43 evidence that the Plaintiff has got a bad reputation, a
44 general bad reputation, for the kind of conduct alleged
45 against him in the words complained of. That is number
46 one. And there is not any. To the extent that McDonald's
47 may have a bad reputation for that kind of thing is
48 attributable to this leaflet. The defendant cannot say,
49 I have given you a bad reputation, therefore the damages
50 should be less.
51
52 MR. JUSTICE BELL: No, that is entirely circular.
53
54 MR. RAMPTON: Yes, exactly. The second thing is this. I am not
55 willing to accept that even if there were such evidence,
56 which there is not, that McDonald's had a bad reputation
57 generally speaking for environmental matters, whatever that
58 may mean, it would not be evidence of the kind of conduct
59 alleged against McDonald's in this part of the leaflet.
60 That is to say, destruction of the rainforest on a vast
