Day 280 - 17 Jul 96 - Page 16
1 entitled to take account of that, in accepting they have
2 told me the truth about that, say, well, is there really
3 any practical advantage in contribution proceedings?
4
5 MR. STARMER: That--
6
7 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Not to put too fine a point on it, for an
8 order for damages it may mean you have got to sell your
9 house to pay for them.
10
11 MR. STARMER: Yes.
12
13 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Then there may be a greater inclination to
14 take contribution proceedings than if you have not got any
15 money for the Plaintiff to get hold of, and there is
16 absolutely no point in taking execution proceedings and
17 seeking to make someone bankrupt. You just run up the
18 legal fees and you do not get anywhere at all, and then the
19 press around the country says McDonald's is being
20 vindictive so McDonald's never dream of doing that in the
21 first place. To what extent am I able to keep this as part
22 of the general picture?
23
24 MR. STARMER: My Lord, I take the point, but the issue is, let
25 us say, it is a significantly substantial amount that these
26 Defendants will want a contribution and succeed in getting
27 a contribution, the extent of their bankruptcy or liability
28 to the Plaintiffs would that be much reduced, and one has
29 to assume that nobody wants to be bankrupted and nobody
30 wants to have that sum hanging over them owed by these
31 Defendants to the Plaintiffs.
32
33 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Except all that all this presumes that they
34 lose in the first place. There cannot be any contribution
35 if they win, and if they lose then whatever the permutation
36 they may very well end up with a large tax bill against
37 which any award of damages might appear to be fairly
38 insignificant. Am I not entitled to keep all these things
39 in the back of my mind?
40
41 MR. STARMER: My Lord, may I just take some instructions
42 because there are various things being said to me.
43
44 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes. When I said 'tax bill', I meant costs
45 order, Mr. Starmer.
46
47 MR. STARMER: I am sorry, my Lord?
48
49 MR. JUSTICE BELL: When I said 'tax bill', I meant costs bill.
50 I mean taxed costs bill.
51
52 MR. STARMER: Yes. I assumed you did. My Lord, taking the
53 first point, which is the extent to which the defendants'
54 lack of funds ought to impinge, my submission is the effect
55 is that any act of the Defendant to reduce the amount of
56 their liability is obviously going to be gratefully
57 received. Nobody knows what the Court is going to decide,
58 and obviously on one scenario the issue is irrelevant. On
59 the other, assuming the Plaintiffs win something, nobody
60 knows the size of that award, but it may well be that the
