Day 162 - 25 Jul 95 - Page 18
1
2 The other thing I would mention is that it relates to
3 residues and also to precedent, I think it is. We are
4 still expecting, I think, to get a supplementary statement
5 from Mr. North.
6
7 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes. What was going to happen there? What
8 is the state of play at the moment?
9
10 MR. MORRIS: I cannot remember. I think -- we have not spoken
11 to Mr. North since -----
12
13 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I think it is very important you put that
14 high on your list of priorities.
15
16 MR. MORRIS: I cannot remember whether it was the pleading that
17 should come first or the -----
18
19 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Quite apart from anything else, you are going
20 to find it difficult to argue an application for leave to
21 amend in relation to residues until you have obtained and
22 served a statement from Mr. North on that.
23
24 MR. RAMPTON: Yes, my Lord. If your Lordship will recall,
25 I said I did not require a pleading. I would be quite
26 happy with a proper statement from Mr. North.
27
28 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes.
29
30 MR. MORRIS: We are still awaiting the documents of Dr. Gomez
31 Gonzales.
32
33 MR. RAMPTON: You will not get those -----
34
35 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Then the transcript of the uncut films or
36 film.
37
38 MR. MORRIS: Yes.
39
40 MR. JUSTICE BELL: What is the position there?
41
42 MR. MORRIS: The position on this is that we have not referred
43 to them deliberately because the person who owns the
44 copyright of those transcripts, which is Jane Gabriel, has
45 specified in allowing us to have them that we do not show
46 them to anybody else and I have signed an agreement to that
47 effect.
48
49 Now that, of course, puts me in an embarrassing situation
50 and she sent letters to this effect. It apparently puts
51 her in an embarrassing situation vis-a-vis Channel 4, and
52 it possibly puts Channel 4 in an embarrassing position
53 vis-a-vis McDonald's because of an agreement they made with
54 McDonald's. So the long and short of it is, even though I
55 have wanted to refer to them, I have not referred to them
56 at all; both of us have not referred to them at all in
57 cross-examination of Miss Anteneh, and I do not know what
58 the situation would be legally. I would argue that they
59 are not necessary for the fair disposal of the action, in
60 any event, on the grounds that the researcher was attending
