Day 251 - 17 May 96 - Page 33


     
     1
     2   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  When was that?
     3        A.  I did not do it for academic research, I did a report
     4        on it.
     5
     6   Q.    No, all I am asking is when the visit to the Indians was?
     7        A.  When I visited the Guaranian Indians, it was when I was
     8        working for the Financial Times, it must have been in the
     9        late 1970's.
    10
    11   MR. RAMPTON:  Those are all the questions.  Thank you Miss
    12        Branford.
    13
    14   MR. JUSTICE BELL: Do you have any re-examination?
    15
    16   MR. MORRIS:  No, no re-examination.
    17
    18   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Thank you, Miss Branford.  Would you like to
    19        go back and sit where you were a moment ago?
    20
    21        There are two matters I want to raise arising partly out of
    22        Miss Branford's evidence.  The first is where Mr. Rampton
    23        has put Pontes e Lacerda and Sinop and Nova Xavantina on
    24        his map, if one ignores the lines actually drawn on the
    25        plotter map and sees where the latitude and longitude marks
    26        are across the lines, the latitude line is not exactly
    27        right.  The longitude feint lines are not right, they may
    28        not have meant to be.
    29
    30   MR. RAMPTON:  No, they are not.  No, I am sorry, they are not.
    31
    32   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  But if one drew lines on the plotter map
    33        which accorded where the latitude and longitude is shown,
    34        Pontes e Lacerda Sinop and Nova Xavantina would appear, to
    35        me, to be in the right place using the vegetation map as
    36        the source.  They may be a very fraction out, but they
    37        would appear to be.
    38
    39   MR. RAMPTON:  That is how I did it, in fact, my Lord.
    40
    41   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  So if there is to be a challenge to their
    42        position at some stage, I would like to know.  That is the
    43        first point.
    44
    45        The second point is this:  I have not actually looked up
    46        the ruling I made in July of last year, slightly amended by
    47        agreement in October of last year, as to Miss Steel's and
    48        Mr. Morris' case about rain forest and Brazil.  But what it
    49        boiled down to was I allowed an amendment, insofar as it
    50        alleged indirect effects on the rain forest, but not so far 
    51        as it allowed direct effect, I think. 
    52 
    53        We have obviously had statements since then.  We have had
    54        the evidence of Miss Branford this morning and, without
    55        actually checking the ruling, it appears to me that there
    56        is an argument, at least, that what I ruled then no longer
    57        applies.  I am not the least bit concerned about that,
    58        unless some point is going to be taken in due course that,
    59        on that date, I ruled that the Defendants could not have
    60        the amendment in the full form they sought and therefore,

Prev Next Index