Day 053 - 22 Nov 94 - Page 33


     
     1
     2   MR. RAMPTON:  I am afraid, Mr. Morris -----
     3
     4   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I would like you to explain, Mr. Rampton.
     5        You can point out to me where it says that, because at 18
     6        you pose a question:  "Is there, in fact, any credible or
     7        reliable scientific evidence of a causal relationship
     8        between, on the one hand, and first, heart disease"; and
     9        then in the next part of your opening you say:  "The
    10        Plaintiffs accept (and have always accepted) that there is
    11        a recognised association between a diet which is high in
    12        fat and salt and heart disease."  It does not say
    13        "causal".  Then, at the end:  "But the Plaintiffs do not
    14        accept that there is any respectable body of scientific
    15        opinion or evidence to suggest a causal relationship
    16        between such a diet and any form of cancer or diabetes."
    17
    18   MR. RAMPTON:  My Lord, precisely.
    19
    20   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  You may say that we can infer from
    21        that -----
    22
    23   MR. RAMPTON:  Well, one must infer from that.  I could not
    24        possibly argue otherwise.  If I have said the dispute, so
    25        far as causation is concerned, concerns cancer and not
    26        heart disease, particularly if one reads the next paragraph
    27        as well, where I am talking about association between
    28        cancer and diet, and I focus again -----
    29
    30   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  But it is inference; it is not expressly
    31        said, is it?
    32
    33   MR. RAMPTON:  Leaving aside all the other arguments -- which,
    34        frankly, mean that this question of heart disease is a
    35        complete red herring -- anybody who thought that it was
    36        part of my case that the association between heart disease
    37        and diet is not a causal one would expect me to call
    38        evidence to that effect; and I expressly disavowed my
    39        intention to do so.
    40
    41   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I must say, Mr. Rampton, I had not understood
    42        at that stage that there was a categoric admission of the
    43        causal relationship between diet and heart disease.  If one
    44        goes over the page, you said:  "Second, the Plaintiff's
    45        experts say first one thing" -----
    46
    47   MR. RAMPTON:  My Lord, I am talking there about the relationship
    48        between cancer and diabetes.
    49
    50   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  It says:  "... irresponsible to propose a 
    51        causal relationship between any of those diseases."  "Any 
    52        of those diseases" might be thought to include heart 
    53        disease, as well as diabetes.
    54
    55   MR. RAMPTON:  My Lord, with respect, not, in the light of what
    56        I have earlier said; it could not be so.  It must mean
    57        certain forms of cancer and diabetes.
    58
    59   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  That is not how I understood it.
    60

Prev Next Index