Day 083 - 06 Feb 95 - Page 37


     
     1        encouraging the use of, "lethal poisons to destroy vast
     2        areas of Central", not south, "American rainforest to
     3        create grazing pastures for cattle to be sent back to the
     4        States as burgers and pet food and to provide fast-food
     5        packaging materials".
     6
     7   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  It is a bit late for to you seek to strike it
     8        out now, is it not?  I understand absolutely your decision
     9        not to have another strike out application because you
    10        wanted to save time and get on with it.
    11
    12   MR. RAMPTON:  Yes.
    13
    14   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  But at least if you had done that, and if the
    15        Defendants had complained about it, they might have got
    16        back to the Court of Appeal rather than seven months into
    17        the trial.
    18
    19   MR. RAMPTON:  I know, and this is not the right time to make
    20        that application.  Either I should have renewed it after
    21        the Court of Appeal.  I might have to renew it at the end
    22        of the case as I am quite entitled to do.
    23
    24   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  You will just argue on the merits then that
    25        there is nothing to support it.
    26
    27   MR. RAMPTON:  There is no defence.
    28
    29   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  It will not be a strike out, will it?
    30
    31   MR. RAMPTON:  No, but this is a question of balance on the
    32        discretion under Order 24, whether it be Rule 8 or Rule 13,
    33        which is the inspection rule, I think.  It is a question of
    34        balance.  One has, with respect, to have regard to what is
    35        actually the libel complained of.  True it is that it says
    36        not only are McDonald's and many other corporations
    37        contributing to a major ecological catastrophe; true it is,
    38        arguably speaking, that has to be read with the previous
    39        allegations of which there is absolutely no evidence at all
    40        in this case; true it is that it says right at the end of
    41        that column as a generality:  "It is no exaggeration to say
    42        that when you bite into a Big Mac you are helping the
    43        McDonald's empire to wreck this planet", but if one uses
    44        that as an aid to striking what one might call the just and
    45        fair balance in this case, then to drive McDonald's to make
    46        discovery, perhaps through their suppliers -- if I am wrong
    47        in the submission I made this morning -- about the sources
    48        of their beef production over a period of maybe 20 or 30
    49        years would, in my submission, be wholly wrong.
    50 
    51   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  That may be so.  What it seems to me is that 
    52        I have to decide a point of principle.  Let us just for the 
    53        sake of argument suppose that I was for your submissions
    54        this morning; it is immediately restricted to documents
    55        which are or have been in the First or Second Plaintiffs'
    56        power, which would not include within the power of their
    57        suppliers unless there was some contractual obligation to
    58        put your clients in possession of them at least if asked.
    59
    60   MR. RAMPTON:  I am sorry, my Lord I did not hear that last

Prev Next Index