Day 313 - 13 Dec 96 - Page 26


     
     1
     2        You also asked the other day about the point in McDonald's
     3        press release where McDonald's claimed that we were
     4        represented by top city lawyers, or something like that.
     5        Sorry, it says, "It has also been suggested that McDonald's
     6        have had the unfair benefit of legal advice.  The group
     7        have long had the informal support of lawyers and this was
     8        formalised with the appointment of a City law firm and two
     9        specialist libel barristers to advise them".
    10
    11        Now, you asked about whether or not that was defamatory of
    12        us.  It could be defamatory in the sense of suggesting
    13        that-----
    14
    15   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I do not think that can be.  It is not
    16        pleaded or referred to.
    17
    18   MS. STEEL:  In a sense.
    19
    20   MR. JUSTICE BELL: I would have thought your point on this is
    21        whether it helps me as to McDonald's motives.
    22
    23   MS. STEEL:  I was going to say, briefly, it could be said that
    24        suggesting we were not entirely being honest about whether
    25        or not we had assistance, and so on, but anyway we have not
    26        specifically complained of that.  But the point is that it
    27        does go to show that McDonald's does not care about the
    28        truth of what they write and, in fact, when Mr. Rampton
    29        said about the purpose of this being in there, when you
    30        asked him the other day, he said "It was a fair response to
    31        the Defendants' repeated dripping on stone of the
    32        suggestion that we were too pathetic, unwaged individuals
    33        going to be taken to the cleaners and crushed in the mangle
    34        of the evil empire of ronald mcdonald."
    35
    36        Whilst we have most definitely never described ourselves as
    37        pathetic, the fact of the matter was we were two unwaged
    38        individuals up against a massive multi-national with almost
    39        unlimited resources and a top legal team, and so the
    40        suggestion made in that paragraph of the press release is
    41        false, and Mr. Rampton has effectively admitted that the
    42        purpose of that allegation was to counter our argument
    43        about the imbalance of resources and hence the unfairness
    44        of the whole procedure.  The fact is that what we were
    45        saying was true, and what McDonald's said was lies.
    46        Obviously, we have said that in court and that is our view.
    47
    48        The final point about the counterclaim.  In relation to
    49        damages we are still not, I do not know, in a position to
    50        put forward a figure because we do not really know.
    51
    52   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I think it is very difficult to put figures
    53        at the moment, it is just that you can if you wish.
    54
    55   MS. STEEL:  Right.  OK.
    56
    57   MR. JUSTICE BELL: But it is not held against you in any way if
    58        you do not.
    59
    60   MS. STEEL:   OK.  Well, just another thing that we would like to

Prev Next Index