Day 164 - 26 Sep 95 - Page 13
1 witnesses still to come.
2
3 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I am just making the point, Mr. Rampton,
4 which I know you are well aware that the further you get on
5 through the trial, it is just human nature to get
6 more disinclined to have the introduction of new material.
7
8 MR. MORRIS: Yes.
9
10 MR. RAMPTON: My Lord, can I say this? I am very unhappy with
11 the end of October for this reason: If there is any
12 substance in what Mr. North says, I myself will have to try
13 to find somebody to give evidence to answer it. That is
14 not going to be easy if it is going to be an expert.
15
16 MR. JUSTICE BELL: When it comes, I will consider whether it is
17 too late.
18
19 MR. RAMPTON: I am grateful to your Lordship.
20
21 MS. STEEL: I think it should be borne in mind that the
22 Plaintiffs had a very long time to sort out getting a
23 further statement from Jarretts.
24
25 MR. JUSTICE BELL: When it comes, if Mr. Rampton says it is too
26 late, I will consider his argument and I will consider your
27 answer to it. I am not going to say now that if it comes
28 at the end of October that will be all right. If you have
29 finished on Store Hygiene and the employment practices,
30 before you move on, I want to ask Mr. Rampton if there is
31 anything he wants to say about the extra Washington Post
32 document; there may or may not be.
33
34 MR. RAMPTON: No. I have so little detail here. This in a
35 sense in a different category because for once it does fall
36 somewhere near the heart of the case.
37
38 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes. I have to say that is how I had seen
39 it.
40
41 MR. RAMPTON: There is no doubt about that. All I would say is
42 this, that one example at one restaurant of over 10,000
43 restaurants in the United States, and goodness knows how
44 many throughout the world, in 1995, about the end of May,
45 beginning of June 1995, actually really proves absolutely
46 nothing. Whether it is true or false, I do not know. But
47 for somebody to have closed a restaurant, it looks like --
48 if this be true, of course, it may not be -- because of an
49 allegation of unclean food contact surfaces, one restaurant
50 in Washington DC at the end of May 1995, in relation to
51 justification of a pamphlet published by these Defendants
52 in 1989, really, it is a matter for question whether it
53 helps your Lordship decide the issues in this case.
54
55 I say that not because in the ordinary way if this had come
56 along at some earlier point I might have been able to deal
57 with it but, of course, it does mean if it is pleaded, then
58 I have to make enquiries once again in the United States.
59 Really, I ask the same question as I asked yesterday,
60 whether it is a proper and fit thing to introduce at this
