Day 053 - 22 Nov 94 - Page 12


     
     1        application to amend in the draft amendment.
     2
     3   MS. STEEL:  A lot of the interpretation that Mr. Rampton was
     4        putting on our questioning yesterday I would reject, in
     5        terms of the witness may have said "caused this" and
     6        "caused that", but we thought that they were being evasive
     7        by trying to avoid saying that there was any link by
     8        saying, "There is no cause."  I can explain this in more
     9        detail.
    10
    11   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Yes.  You carry on.
    12
    13   MR. MORRIS:  This proposed amendment is clearly an extension in
    14        two ways, cause and the meals:  from "linked with"
    15        to "cause", which is shifting the goal posts upwards, if
    16        you like; and "contents of the meal" and "sell meals",
    17        which is again shifting it upwards.  That is, it is quite
    18        clear to us, the reason they are making that amendment.
    19        Otherwise, why change it to "sell meals"?  Why not just
    20        say, "The contents of an average McDonald's meal are
    21        causally linked with cancer of the breast and bowel"?  By
    22        adding "in their customers", they are again shifting the
    23        ground upwards in their favour.
    24
    25        So, if this had been pleaded, not only is it changing the
    26        case and changing the case at a late stage, but if it had
    27        been originally in the Statement of Claim, it is quite
    28        possible we would have argued that this should have been
    29        struck out, because the words are not capable of any
    30        reasonable-minded person in this country reading the
    31        well-argued fact sheet on that section as meaning
    32        "McDonald's sell meals which cause cancer in their
    33        customers" -- completely ludicrous and impossible.
    34
    35        If there is a midway position (which we do not accept), our
    36        position is that it is very, very clear on the links
    37        between diet and disease, and that McDonald's have a
    38        responsibility because they promote that kind of diet and
    39        they sell that kind of food.
    40
    41        In the paragraph above that particular sentence, it says:
    42        "McDonald's show that mass-produced hamburgers", not "show
    43        that their mass-produced, hamburgers, chips, colas".  It is
    44        talking about "mass-produced hamburgers, chips, colas and
    45        milkshakes are a useful nutritious part of any diet".  So
    46        they are talking about -- even McDonald's food, when the
    47        leaflet does mention McDonald's food, it is as an example
    48        of that kind of food.
    49
    50        To us, it is absolutely crystal clear, and it would be 
    51        crystal clear to everybody until fairly recently in the 
    52        history of this case, what that is saying. 
    53
    54   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  What is it saying?  What is it saying that is
    55        crystal clear?
    56
    57   MR. MORRIS:  It is crystal clear that it is talking about diet
    58        linked to disease.  We do not contend -----
    59
    60   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  What does "linked" mean there?

Prev Next Index