Day 083 - 06 Feb 95 - Page 06
1 Plaintiffs' claim on food poisoning should be struck out
2 because it is not specifically about McDonald's, or we
3 should be allowed to meet it in whatever way we see fit
4 which, obviously, includes BSE.
5
6 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Is there anything you want to add?
7
8 MR. MORRIS: Yes. I agree with everything Helen has said. It
9 is just to emphasise the point that Mr. Rampton has
10 accepted our right to call evidence on other matters that
11 are not specifically mentioned by name in the fact sheet;
12 secondly, this has been, as we have said, mentioned in two
13 statements served, including one served two years ago, in
14 terms of being, one, with Alan Long as regards being a
15 cattle disease of relevance and, secondly, with Marla Lisa
16 Hovey's statement being something that is recognised as a
17 risk for humans. She deals with the European
18 specifications to the steps that the EEC have taken to
19 respond to the risk. Obviously, we are saying that should
20 apply to the UK as well in that there should be steps taken
21 to respond to the risk in the UK. That is all I have to
22 say.
23
24 MR. RAMPTON: My Lord, can I, first of all, deal with that? The
25 fact that Ms. Hovey makes reference to what might or might
26 not happen within the EC is quite apparent from her
27 statement. That has nothing whatever to do with
28 McDonald's. The fact that Mr. Long mentions it does not
29 make it relevant. In any event, he is not an expert in the
30 subject, Dr. Dealer is.
31
32 My Lord, may I first of all slay the chimaera that
33 Ms. Steel has created to the effect that I first raised
34 this question of BSE with Dr. Gomez Gonzalez; of course,
35 that is not so. It was first raised, at any rate so far as
36 transcripts are concerned, by Mr. Morris in
37 cross-examination of Mr. Preston on Day 4, 1st July 1994,
38 on page 29 at lines 1 to 38 towards the end of which
39 I objected and said that I thought that if the Defendants
40 were going to ask questions about BSE, they had better put
41 their heads together and produce an amendment to the
42 Defence.
43
44 Mr. Morris then came back to the question in the
45 cross-examination of Mr. Oakley, also before Dr. Gomez
46 Gonzalez was called to give evidence on Day 61,
47 5th December 1994, page 70, lines 42 to 48. So, your
48 Lordship will see why I thought it advisable to ask
49 Dr. Gomez Gonzales a question about it, the Defendants,
50 despite my urging back in July, not having produced any
51 amendment, not having in their hand when they
52 cross-examined Mr. Oakley the statement of Dr. Dealer.
53
54 My Lord, may I just say a short word? I want to try to
55 avoid so far as I can repeating anything I said when
56 I opened my submission.
57
58 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I think you take your own course, but I would
59 like help on any analogy with diabetes and CFCs and whether
60 the topic, regardless of your second point, can be brought
