Day 186 - 10 Nov 95 - Page 12
1 they will just go on to reading the text. It is the text
2 that is telling them what the leaflet is about, not the
3 cartoons and not the headings.
4
5 I would particularly note that the Plaintiffs seem to be
6 insinuating that it ups the initial paragraph to meaning
7 that you are going to get cancer if you eat their food;
8 just the fact that it does not say anything about disease
9 or cancer or any of those things.
10
11 Sorry, there was actually a part that I wanted to refer to,
12 something that Mr. Rampton said on the previous occasion.
13 I am just trying to find it. (Pause) Yes. Mr. Rampton
14 mentioned about "over-elaborate analysis". I would say
15 that this applies to the Plaintiffs' argument about the
16 meaning of the leaflet, not ours. They have gone to great
17 lengths to try to tie all these things together, as though
18 people read each heading individually and then went and
19 then searched the leaflet for the particular part that
20 referred to that, or that they looked at the cartoon and
21 then searched the leaflet for the particular part referring
22 to that. It is the Plaintiffs that are trying to tie in
23 things that are not connections that the reasonable reader
24 is going to be trying to tie in together.
25
26 He also said that in Duncan and Neill it said that
27 Plaintiffs cannot select an isolated passage in an article
28 and complain of that alone if other parts of the article
29 throw a different light on that passage. He said that
30 referred to our case. We say that it refers to the
31 Plaintiffs' case. The Plaintiffs cannot select a heading
32 or a cartoon and complain about that heading or cartoon, if
33 the passage in the leaflet or the leaflet in its entirety
34 throws a different light on the heading or the cartoon.
35
36 I have more things to say about what Mr. Rampton said in
37 argument. I am not really sure -- I know Dave wants to
38 talk about the context of the leaflet, so it may be better
39 to do that first. But you wanted us to comment on your
40 proposed meaning as well.
41
42 MR. JUSTICE BELL: You do not have to, but you can certainly
43 take that course if you wish and say why you would argue --
44 if you do, as you obviously do, because your draft is
45 different, as it were, to mine -- say why you think that is
46 not a meaning which the ordinary reasonable reader would
47 put on it. But you take your own course. Do you want
48 Mr. Morris to go now?
49
50 MS. STEEL: It might give me a chance to get my thoughts back
51 together, actually.
52
53 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes.
54
55 MR. MORRIS: Right. I have to sort of start at the beginning,
56 because I was going to make a submission as well and try
57 not to be repetitive.
58
59 MR. JUSTICE BELL: In so far as you have a point and you think
60 Ms. Steel said it as well as can be said, all you need to
