Day 053 - 22 Nov 94 - Page 16
1 MR. JUSTICE BELL: That is where I would like you to tell me why
2 that is, because at the moment I am not minded to agree
3 with that, that there is that distinction.
4
5 MR. MORRIS: I think that, really, the onus should be on
6 Mr. Rampton, because he says -- which we do not agree with,
7 but this is trying to clarify the issues, and we say it is,
8 in fact, confusing the issues, shutting the stable door
9 after the horse has bolted, so to speak. It is clear to us
10 that McDonald's has changed the form of wording, because it
11 is different from the original. We would say that if it
12 means -- rather than as it says in the leaflet, these diets
13 that are "high in fat, sugar, animal products and salt
14 (sodium), and low in fibre, vitamins and minerals" -- is
15 the issue to meaning that we have to show that somebody
16 consuming meals at McDonald's has died of cancer or heart
17 disease because of the amount of McDonald's foods they have
18 eaten in their lives, then to us, it is a dramatic
19 extension and change. (sic) That is why they have done it,
20 basically. If they had put that originally down in the
21 original 16 points, then I am pretty sure we would have
22 been advised to have changed that as a meaning that is not
23 capable of being -----
24
25 MR. JUSTICE BELL: You are doing that now, anyway; you are doing
26 that, and your resistance to this application is saying, in
27 any event, whatever the other rights and wrongs may be, you
28 it is not a meaning which the leaflet is capable of
29 bearing. There is no point in pleading meanings which
30 the leaflet is not capable of bearing. I understand you
31 are making that point
32
33 MS. STEEL: Certainly not at this late stage of proceedings, as
34 well.
35
36 MR. JUSTICE BELL: That is why I said whatever the other rights
37 and wrongs of the matter.
38
39 MR. MORRIS: Can I just say one last point on context, before I
40 sit down: just that the context that Mr. Rampton, we would
41 say, relied upon to try to justify this change of meaning
42 at this late stage, he referred to authorities in that the
43 content is allowed to be relied upon to some extent. But
44 the authorities equally referred to the content being
45 relied upon conversely, that if other aspects of the
46 content, in fact, show how McDonald's back up our statement
47 that it is talking about diet, rather than specifically the
48 amount of ingestion of McDonald's food making a difference,
49 it is clear to us that the whole context of the leaflet is
50 generic, in terms of looking at the fast-food industry.
51 Therefore, that backs up what is clearly obvious to us in
52 any case in the actual text of that section.
53
54 So the context of the leaflet, in fact, is evidence and
55 back up for our position, that what it actually says in
56 that section is, in fact, what it means, rather than what
57 Mr. Rampton says, that the context alters what it obviously
58 means in that section.
59
60 So, in fact, he is relying on the context. We are not
