Day 186 - 10 Nov 95 - Page 37
1 that they are deliberately withholding information, just
2 that the guides are lacking in information, and is not
3 specifically about what they have put in the food; it is
4 about what is or is not in the nutrition guides. To say
5 that the guides are lacking in information can hardly be
6 said to be defamatory.
7
8 It seems to me, reading this case, that the only exception
9 to not being able to say that the food caused ill health
10 was if you actually said that it instantaneously caused you
11 to become ill, in terms of saying that it was poisonous as
12 in, you know, you start writhing around on the ground
13 straight after eating it. There is reference in the
14 judgments to the defendant having said that it would
15 produce more customers for him as a surgeon -- which
16 clearly is talking about people becoming ill, which would
17 be parallel with heart disease and cancer; and they said
18 that that was not defamatory to say that the products could
19 make people ill. I am sorry, I have actually lost the part
20 where it said -----
21
22 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I think it is on page 565, is it not? Is it
23 the penultimate, very long sentence in the first paragraph
24 of the Lord President's judgment?
25
26 "Now, if the pursuer had been prepared to say
27 that these words were used as meaning that the
28 bread was calculated instantly to destroy human
29 life, that would have been an allegation of a
30 different kind from the others; but it was
31 conceded in argument that nothing more was
32 intended than to convey, by a strong form of
33 expression, the idea that the bread was
34 unwholesome."
35
36 A little later, it says that if the allegation was of
37 adulteration, which is adding something harmful, then it
38 would be different.
39
40 MS. STEEL: Right. Well, I think it is clear that in our case
41 there is no allegation in the leaflet that McDonald's have
42 deliberately made -----
43
44 MR. JUSTICE BELL: It is the bottom of the following page, 566.
45
46 MS. STEEL: Right. There is no allegation in the leaflet that
47 McDonald's have deliberately made the food that they sell
48 bad for people's health, that they have put extra fat in in
49 order to cause people to get heart disease and/or cancer or
50 whatever. Therefore, there is no -- well, there is no
51 allegation of deliberate intent.
52
53 I think the paragraph that you read out was one of the
54 important points, about it being calculated to "instantly
55 destroy human life", but there was another point, which
56 I cannot remember where it was, about the surgeon getting
57 extra custom because people became ill as a result of
58 eating the bread.
59
60 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Is it the beginning of Lord Deas' judgment?
