Day 307 - 27 Nov 96 - Page 19


     
     1        "Libel Action Background Briefing", it does not appear in
     2        the other two documents, I do not think, and it is taken
     3        from the second to last paragraph of the "Libel Action
     4        Background Briefing", which says:  "These two individuals",
     5        which is a clear reference to us, "have chosen to defend
     6        the leaflet and, contrary to their claims that they are not
     7        actively involved, they have for many years taken leading
     8        roles in a consistent campaign against McDonald's,
     9        including responsibility for organising demonstrations and
    10        anti-McDonald's fairs".
    11
    12        The Plaintiffs' pleaded meaning (f) is: "The Defendants
    13        have made false claims as to their involvement in a
    14        persistent campaign against McDonald's by denying that they
    15        have for many years taken prominent roles therein".  Now,
    16        we would say that that is not the natural and ordinary
    17        meaning of that paragraph.  The "prominent roles" is a step
    18        down from leading roles, and people might think it was, for
    19        example, more justified to take action against somebody who
    20        was in charge or having a leading role than they would
    21        against somebody who had a prominent role.  Obviously, we
    22        do not accept this anyway, but the point is the words that
    23        are used in the press release are "leading role", not
    24        "prominent".
    25
    26        The second point about their meaning is that it does not
    27        include the part about "including responsibility for
    28        organising demonstrations and anti-McDonald's fairs", which
    29        all add to the impression in the public's mind that we are,
    30        you know, heavily -- well, we are leading a heavy campaign
    31        against the Plaintiffs with persistent and frequent
    32        demonstrations and anti-McDonald's events that are
    33        organised by us personally.
    34
    35        Anyway, I mean, really that is the meaning, and, to sum up,
    36        it is obvious we consider that the meanings we have pleaded
    37        are the natural and ordinary meanings of the press releases
    38        and leaflet distributed by McDonald's, and that their
    39        meanings are not the natural and ordinary meanings which
    40        would be attached to those documents by reasonable members
    41        of the public.
    42
    43        I do not know if it is appropriate to have the break?
    44
    45   MR. JUSTICE BELL:   Yes, we will take the five minute break.
    46
    47                         (Short Adjournment)
    48
    49   MS. STEEL:   Now, then, on page 4 of the defence to counterclaim
    50        the Plaintiffs go on to say that, if necessary, the Second 
    51        Plaintiff will rely upon the provisions of section 5 of the 
    52        Defamation Act 1952, which is justification, or that they 
    53        are going to justify the attack on us that was made in
    54        these press releases and leaflets.  Then, underneath that,
    55        they give as particulars.  They say, "The following
    56        pleadings in the main action are here repeated", and they
    57        say the Statement of Claim as number one, and all the
    58        further and better particulars, obviously.
    59
    60        So they are therefore stating here that they are setting

Prev Next Index