Day 205 - 17 Jan 96 - Page 29


     
     1   MR. MORRIS:  The second sentence in 26/2/2 is: "He is bound to
     2        answer as to his own individual knowledge" -- which of
     3        course Mr. Stein has done -- "and to get information from
     4        other servants or agents of the corporation or company who
     5        have personally conducted the transaction or have vital
     6        knowledge as such servants or agents.  An answer confined
     7        to his own knowledge is insufficient.  It is his duty to
     8        make inquiries among the other officials and servants of
     9        the company."
    10
    11        It then goes on to say:  "In order to show the duty has
    12        been complied with, the person answering the
    13        interrogatories should include in the answers a statement
    14        in general terms that he is attempting to discharge his
    15        duty", et cetera.
    16
    17   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  All this is if an interrogatory is actually
    18        served with my leave.
    19
    20   MR. MORRIS:  That is what I am arguing, that the serving of an
    21        interrogatory is compelling the Company to make all
    22        diligent inquiries to the relevant people.  McDonald's have
    23        said in court that they have regional officials who monitor
    24        the day-to-day workings of their stores and who presumably
    25        know about when the stores are fined or criticised by the
    26        local authorities for violating the laws, because it is a
    27        condition (they say) in the contract that they have to
    28        adhere to laws.  So, obviously, the breaking of laws would
    29        be a matter for the corporation to be involved and to take
    30        action and no doubt to issue press statements or whatever.
    31
    32        So, it is clear from 26/2/2 that Mr. Stein's voluntary
    33        statement where he only checked records is a completely
    34        different kettle of fish from an interrogatory where he
    35        would be under obligation to make all diligent inquiries of
    36        all the relevant people.  On those grounds, Mr. Rampton, we
    37        would say, is incorrect in saying that has all been dealt
    38        with and let us all forget about it.  Really, I cannot see
    39        any problem.  I am sorry to get slightly -----
    40
    41   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I have to say, I will give a short ruling on
    42        it, but I am against you at the moment because I do think,
    43        with my experience, that the answer which has been given by
    44        Mr. Stein in a corporation of this size would be a
    45        sufficient answer to an interrogatories to the same
    46        effect.  Have you actually made any inquiries yourself, for
    47        instance, of any authority in the United States?  You have
    48        some -----
    49
    50   MR. MORRIS:  It is not conceivable that we have the time and 
    51        ability to do these kind of inquiries. 
    52 
    53   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  It does not follow from that that your
    54        opponent should do them for you, you see.  Let us just have
    55        a look.  Refer me to the parts of what you say is the Civil
    56        Evidence Act evidence of Mr. Stein to the Congressional
    57        Committee which might cover this, in broad terms.
    58
    59   MR. RAMPTON:   My Lord, may I advance beyond the bar and get a
    60        bit of paper which I do not have?

Prev Next Index