Day 186 - 10 Nov 95 - Page 22
1 stronger than the leaflet. The leaflet does not say
2 anything about causal links between diet and disease. But
3 I cannot see, fundamentally, the problem with people making
4 that kind of statement, even if they had a picture of a
5 McDonald's burger, and criticising the links between junk
6 food and disease. I am sure -- well, that is basically
7 it. That is the context, as I see it.
8
9 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes. Thank you.
10
11 MS. STEEL: It might be best if I deal with the meaning that
12 you propose.
13
14 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Right.
15
16 MS. STEEL: The first problem that I see with it is where it
17 says "very real risk". I am not entirely sure what was
18 intended by that, but to me that would imply a higher than
19 -- I do not know what -- well, a high percentage chance
20 that you would get those diseases, which I think goes a
21 long way beyond what the leaflet says, even if you took it
22 as meaning a causal link.
23
24 I think, also, as well as being true of the words "very
25 real", that was also true of the words "you will suffer
26 cancer", that that is too much of a definite.
27
28 The part about: "Although McDonald's know or ought to know
29 this, they do not make it clear and they falsely claim that
30 their food is nutritious", etcetera; there is not anything
31 in the leaflet that says that they know or necessarily that
32 they ought to know this. Obviously, it has emerged from
33 the trial that they did know this, but what has emerged
34 during the trial is not going to be known to the person on
35 the street; and it does not say in that section of the
36 leaflet that McDonald's do know this.
37
38 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I think what I had in mind there -- you have
39 surmised correctly why I put "very real risk" in. If that
40 were the meaning, it would come from, among other things,
41 the Arches and the cartoon, among other matters, having
42 some effect on the ordinary reasonable reader. You have
43 made your point about that, and I understand your point
44 about that.
45
46 The "know" or "ought to know", if it came, might be argued
47 to come from the ordinary reader knowing that McDonald's
48 are a very large concern selling an awful lot of food; and
49 the leaflet refers to an accepted medical fact -- which,
50 again, a large corporation, with the benefit of all the
51 advice it might be expected to get, might therefore be
52 expected to know or be negligent if they did not.
53
54 MS. STEEL: I am not particularly worried about that part
55 because, as I say, it has emerged during this trial that
56 they are aware of the links, because of their own pamphlet
57 published at the same time. All I am saying is, to my
58 reading, it is not specifically stated in the leaflet that
59 they know or they ought to know.
60
