Day 083 - 06 Feb 95 - Page 38
1 phrase. If asked for the purposes of something other than
2 the contract?
3
4 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes, well, if asked for the purposes of these
5 proceedings.
6
7 MR. RAMPTON: Yes. That would certainly limit it. But, my
8 Lord, I remind your Lordship -- in one sense now I repeat
9 myself -- the issue on Brazil arose because the Defendants
10 have some evidence, thanks to a mistake in the solicitors'
11 office, which disproves their case on Brazil. That is the
12 first point.
13
14 MR. JUSTICE BELL: You say that; at the moment again I am not at
15 this stage offering any view on it one way or another, but
16 they say "no".
17
18 MR. RAMPTON: No, my Lord. They cannot say "no", with respect.
19 They are Defendants driven to justify a libel.
20
21 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes.
22
23 MR. RAMPTON: In what I might call a quarter baked attempt to do
24 that, they allege that the Plaintiffs' use of beef in
25 certain countries (and I will come back to this in a
26 moment) causes indirect damage to the environment. They
27 cannot (because there is no evidence and it would be
28 impossible for them to do so) allege that the Plaintiffs
29 directly interfere with the rainforests anywhere in the
30 world. So, that is abandoned, that part of the leaflet.
31
32 As a fall-back, perhaps with an eye principally to
33 reduction of damages originally, they say: "Oh, well, the
34 fact that you encourage beef production may have an adverse
35 effect on the environment". They are confined, because of
36 what has been pleaded, originally to two countries,
37 Guatemala and Costa Rica.
38
39 MR. JUSTICE BELL: It starts at the bottom of the first extract
40 in tab 1, does it not? I think it would help me if you
41 have it.
42
43 MR. RAMPTON: Yes, my Lord, but this is where one may run into
44 difficulties if one forgets what orders have been made
45 along the way. If your Lordship looks at the particulars
46 given on page 3 of tab 1, one sees that the allegations
47 are, in fact, limited to Costa Rica and Guatemala,
48 Guatemala and Costa Rica, in certain years. After the
49 request is set out on page 8, one finds it further on on
50 pages 10 and 11, then further on page 12, the case becoming
51 progressively more refined -- I will remind your Lordship
52 of the reason for that in a moment.
53
54 Aside from the allegation that meat from Central America is
55 exported for the Plaintiffs' use in the United States, once
56 again the Defendants have what one might call a somewhat
57 transparent -- in two senses it is a slight pun because it
58 is the "Jungle Burger" film -- basis, aside from that, they
59 are confined on the pleadings to Costa Rica and Guatemala
60 in certain years, certain specified years. My Lord, the
