Day 164 - 26 Sep 95 - Page 43


     
     1
     2   MR. MORRIS:  This is one of Mr. Rampton's allegedly marginal
     3        unimportant sort of thing.  It does not really affect
     4        McDonald's Corporation, yet they are going to bring two or
     5        three franchisees as witnesses to deal with.  So obviously
     6        it is a very important issue.  We have not got any
     7        statements yet or any names of witnesses that the
     8        Plaintiffs intend to call, even though our statements were
     9        served last year.  But, again to benefit the court and to
    10        benefit the witnesses on both sides, if any documents exist
    11        in the possession, power or control of the Plaintiffs they
    12        should be disclosed.  We have not had any documents
    13        disclosed yet about this incident that we served witness
    14        statements from a year ago.
    15
    16        The argument about whether a document is in the possession,
    17        power or control of the Plaintiffs would follow after they
    18        are ordered to give discovery of any relevant documents in
    19        their possession, power and control.  The point is we are
    20        applying for documents which we believe will be in the
    21        control of the Plaintiffs.  I am sure the McDonald's
    22        Corporation investigated this highly controversial (and
    23        continuing to be controversial) situation, an investigation
    24        by the authorities, in fact, and into their McDonald's
    25        stores there.  I am pretty certain they would have wanted
    26        to see all the relevant documents.
    27
    28        Again, I think this is a question of a simple order that
    29        they provide any documents which they are under an
    30        obligation to give in any case, a general obligation, on
    31        this issue, but we have specified particularly these 50
    32        statements if they are in their possession, power and
    33        control.
    34
    35        OK, if they do not exist or if they not in their
    36        possession, power and control, then we deal with that when
    37        we come to it.  I do not think we need to jump the gun and
    38        have a trial within a trial at this stage until we know
    39        what the response is by the Plaintiffs to them being
    40        ordered to hand over the documents.
    41
    42   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Do you want to take the break there?  On the
    43        list of discovery matters which occur to me that would
    44        leave the question of full notes of Enquiry Agents.
    45
    46                         (Short Adjournment)
    47
    48   MS. STEEL:  To be honest, I had not prepared to do the argument
    49        on the blanked out passages in the statements, but I think
    50        it is a fairly simple argument, although I am not in a 
    51        position to refer to all the different examples. 
    52 
    53   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I think you have to do so because without
    54        looking up the GE case I have to have some reason to
    55        presume that the parts which McDonald's say are not
    56        relevant are or are likely to be.  That is no doubt a
    57        rather inaccurate summary of GE Capital but it is probably
    58        the essence of it.  I will obviously hear what you say, but
    59        I do not think you can assume that I will just say, yes,
    60        well, they were enquiring into what was going on in the

Prev Next Index