Day 146 - 03 Jul 95 - Page 34


     
     1        should be listed in relation to an issue in the main action
     2        anyway?
     3
     4   MR. ATKINSON:   I was actually going to say to your Lordship,
     5        when your Lordship was talking about publication before and
     6        you said you were not confusing the two issues as between
     7        the main action and the counterclaim, I was going to say in
     8        practice any documents that are given in relation to
     9        publication and the defence to counterclaim obviously are
    10        relevant to publication in the main.
    11
    12   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I wondered whether there was something
    13        terribly subtle about it that you have sought these in the
    14        letter of 3rd February related to issues in the defence to
    15        counterclaim as opposed to an issue on the claim itself,
    16        namely publication or not.
    17
    18   MR. ATKINSON:   I wish I were capable of that sort of ----
    19
    20   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I wondered if you were concern that
    21        publication of all the other documents which might be said
    22        to carry much the same message as certain parts of the
    23        leaflet which is complained of could not be relied upon as
    24        similar fact.
    25
    26   MR. ATKINSON:   Certainly, it is true that the defence to
    27        counterclaim goes beyond the Statement of Claim in the
    28        sense that it relies on these other pamphlets and leaflets
    29        that we say have been published by the Defendants.  So, to
    30        that extent, it is wider.  Yes, you are right in saying
    31        that.
    32
    33   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Because you do not rely upon what you say the
    34        Defendants did in relation to those other documents if
    35        evidence of actual publication of the leaflet which is
    36        complained of in the Statement of Claim.
    37
    38   MR. ATKINSON:   Well, indirectly ----
    39
    40   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  But one does not prove the other.
    41
    42   MR. ATKINSON:   Certainly it cannot prove it directly in a
    43        sense.  It may be that your Lordship thinks it helps to
    44        build up some sort of inference, but that is as far as it
    45        goes, I think.
    46
    47        My Lord, anyway, the list, I have added in these things
    48        about the financial affairs of the group because in two of
    49        the supplementary statements that we served from the
    50        private investigator, Mr. Pocklington and Mr. Bishop, there 
    51        is reference in those statements to the involvement of 
    52        either Ms. Steel or both of the Defendants in relation to 
    53        the bank account or the payment of bills for London
    54        Greenpeace.  We would say that the campaign against
    55        McDonald's includes not only London Greenpeace but also the
    56        McLibel support campaign as the case has gone on.  I will
    57        just give you -- it is paragraphs 20 and 21 of
    58        Mr. Pocklington's supplementary statement, which is at
    59        tab 7, what is said to be tab 7C.
    60

Prev Next Index