Day 294 - 05 Nov 96 - Page 13
1 than some of the others.
2
3 MR. MORRIS: The point though is that the mere use of additives
4 is not in itself defamatory, but obviously when there are
5 additives which are harmful or there is a risk of them
6 being harmful, then it is relevant to the claim of "K",
7 meaning "K", about the potential to do harm.
8
9 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes.
10
11 MR. MORRIS: So, which again, as I said about the at worst
12 poisonous is a general charge without specifying what the
13 cause would be, and there are hints and specific references
14 to where the harm would emanate from, which we have heard
15 from diets, from residues, from food poisoning incidents
16 and from harmful additives. From the unnecessary use of
17 additives as well.
18
19 As for their meaning that they use - what was the last
20 one - sell hamburgers which are very likely to cause food
21 poisoning, if McDonald's think that is what the leaflet
22 says, they must be completely incapable of reading
23 something with a clear mind. The only reference to, as I
24 say, hamburgers causing food poisoning is the "What's Your
25 Poison" box, and that is very clearly expressed in a
26 responsible way.
27
28 I don't say you are very likely to get food poisoning if
29 you eat hamburgers, but there is a risk, a risk which, for
30 example, the government recognised in 1991 following the
31 Preston incident when they issued a national press release
32 and publicity campaign to encourage people to cook their
33 burgers longer, and McDonald's also announced that they
34 were going cook their burgers longer, precisely because
35 that risk was not only recognised as being a risk, but also
36 that the result of not taking it seriously might be that
37 people suffer serious illness, such as happened in Preston
38 and as happened in 1992 in the USA at McDonald's. I think
39 that is....
40
41 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes, we will break off there. Two o'clock.
42
43 (Luncheon Adjournment)
44
45 MR. MORRIS: Just before we come to what we might call our core
46 evidence, core submissions, I want to say something in
47 terms of the risk of food poisoning. In Mr. Rampton's
48 opening speech, on page 42 of that speech, he refers to
49 McDonald's "recognising as they do" -- this is line 9 --
50 "that the risk of food poisoning may also occur at
51 different stages before ever the food gets into the
52 restaurants, for example at the slaughter house or in the
53 meat processing factory. McDonald's insist on the highest
54 standards of quality and hygiene control by their
55 suppliers."
56
57 So we say, there you are, McDonald's recognise that the
58 risk of food poisoning may also occur at different stages
59 before the customer; just common sense, really. I have not
60 really dealt with our meaning that much. I think I will
