Day 107 - 24 Mar 95 - Page 80
1 you can have any discussion you want with Mr. North
2 concerning Preston or pesticide residues. Is there any
3 reserve about that, Mr. Rampton?
4
5 MR. RAMPTON: No. There may be an extent to which the
6 Defendants see a discussion about Preston as an
7 opportunity, perhaps, to reflect upon some of the evidence
8 that has been given this afternoon in cross-examination;
9 that I suppose is inevitable.
10
11 MR. JUSTICE BELL: The only other matter is the matter which
12 I raised which was the question of the documentation, but
13 that seemed to go by. I think Preston and the pesticide
14 residues.
15
16 MR. MORRIS: Yes.
17
18 MR. JUSTICE BELL: What you must do with regard to Preston is
19 decide what matters which appear in the Preston report
20 really as assertions of fact that Mr. North might want to
21 rely on and his conclusions from them which should really
22 go into a further report, which can also deal with
23 pesticide residues as well. If they are done separately
24 I have no objection to that, but it is better to do it in
25 one go.
26
27 I do not want to get back into the debate. What you have
28 to concentrate on is what are the facts in relation to
29 Preston which you say help you, and not get led down the
30 road of saying that PHLS report, expressing a view of a
31 certain kind, accounts for something in its own right,
32 because once you go on to that you have stepped off the
33 pitch. You take advice on it at some stage.
34
35 MR. MORRIS: Can we emphasise that we have put a Civil Evidence
36 Act notice on the report. There has been no counter
37 notice. We had pleaded our -----
38
39 MR. JUSTICE BELL: You are going back over the same ground.
40 I begin to regret ever mentioning the PHLS report.
41 I cannot say the same thing time and time again.
42
43 MR. RAMPTON: My Lord, the way round this problem that
44 I suggested and which may avoid the Defendants continuing
45 the misconception of the effect of a Civil Evidence Act
46 notice, and also any difficulty there may be about
47 discussing evidence given today with the Defendants, the
48 way I suggested to Mr. North that he might care to do it,
49 is for him to look at the report, focus on any part of it,
50 assume on a hypothetical basis that the facts therein
51 stated were true; ask himself whether those or any of those
52 facts give rise to any general implications about
53 McDonald's procedures or methods from a food safety point
54 of view, and make his comments on that. There one will
55 have all in one go Mr. North's views and a ready-made
56 pleading for the Defendants. I am not suggesting they put
57 it in as a defence.
58
59 MR. JUSTICE BELL: You are not required to put in a formal
60 pleading. What the Plaintiffs then have is notice of the
