Day 278 - 11 Jul 96 - Page 46


     
     1        was particulars.
     2
     3   MR. RAMPTON:  My Lord, I am sorry, I think it was particulars.
     4
     5   MS. STEEL:  Yes, unless we served particulars of rainforest case
     6        within seven days, that our case on that was going to be
     7        struck out and that we had said we did not have any
     8        evidence.  Obviously, that is a complete load of rubbish.
     9        Because if we had said that we do not have any evidence
    10        then I am sure Master Grant would have struck out there and
    11        then.
    12
    13             That was the very first hearing that we ever
    14        attended.  I looked it up last night, I went to my files
    15        and looked at what happened at the hearing.  That was the
    16        very first hearing we ever attended.  We did not understand
    17        the procedure, we asked for it to be explained and it was
    18        not, and we did not know.  We were just asking, "Well, how
    19        do we how do we do the particulars?  How are we supposed to
    20        do this?"  You know, we didn't not know what we were
    21        supposed to be doing.
    22
    23             It was not about the rainforests and it was not an
    24        order that was made for seven days.  McDonald's were trying
    25        to get the whole of our case struck out.  After some
    26        argument, we showed Master Grant that, in particular the
    27        parts about employment that they were trying to get struck
    28        out, they had completely asked the wrong questions about
    29        the wrong text and the questions did not make any sense.
    30        And he made an order about all the pleadings except the
    31        employment stuff that we should serve further particulars
    32        in 28 days.  And it is not that this particularly matters,
    33        but the point is that if McDonald's, if Mr. Rampton in his
    34        recounting of what happened on that occasion can get that
    35        so wrong when he has actually got an order available to him
    36        about what was decided at that hearing, and if anyone wants
    37        to look at it I have got it here, then that just shows how
    38        unreliable the information is concerning the rest of what
    39        he said happened on that day.
    40
    41             If I just add that the reason that I did not
    42        specifically remember what had happened at the hearing of
    43        Master Grant on that date was that we have had over, you
    44        know, between 25 and 30 pretrial hearings.  So, you know, I
    45        cannot specifically remember what happens on each day,
    46        though I can remember what did not happen.
    47
    48             Just a minor point, but I do not whether Mr. Rampton
    49        is going to make something of it because he seemed to be
    50        yesterday.  Just about people using other names.
    51        Obviously, we have heard that the private investigators
    52        were all using other names anyway.  But, in particular, in
    53        political groups it is not unusual for people who are
    54        writing letters to newspapers and so on to use other names,
    55        because of concern about the fact that those with vested
    56        interests may want to take action to stop them.  For
    57        example, the Economic League kept a register of political
    58        and trade union activists from the which information was
    59        available to subscribers to use to vet employees.  And that
    60        I was well aware of that and I am sure that most people who

Prev Next Index