Day 182 - 02 Nov 95 - Page 53
1 called for you to provide them as live witnesses if you can
2 or has he?
3
4 MR. RAMPTON: I cannot because they are overseas.
5
6 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I know, but there might have been an
7 indication: "We would, nevertheless, like you to get them
8 here if possible".
9
10 MR. RAMPTON: No, absolutely not.
11
12 MR. JUSTICE BELL: No, it has not happened.
13
14 MR. RAMPTON: I am entirely neutral about that. It saves time
15 if they do not come.
16
17 MR. MORRIS: What I will try to do is I will try to make contact
18 by the end of this weekend and try to see what the
19 situation is. My understanding is that the owner of the
20 stores that are relevant in this dispute in the Lyons area
21 is now the Managing Director of McDonald's, France.
22 Whatever legal complications he claims, or the Plaintiffs
23 have claimed, that he has, it does not strike us that the
24 instructions would be very difficult.
25
26 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I differ from you on that. I think they are
27 widespread matters. The other thing you have to consider
28 -- I said this to you before -- is that what you hope to
29 gain by calling the witness, unless it is to get a whole
30 lot of new information of which notice has not yet been
31 given.
32
33 MR. MORRIS: Right. You see, our position is (and always has
34 been) that we prefer to call our witnesses if we can
35 because their evidence is stronger for that.
36
37 MR. JUSTICE BELL: No, I do not accept -----
38
39 MR. MORRIS: I understand this is not challenged.
40
41 MR. JUSTICE BELL: That may be so where there is a challenge.
42 In theory, it is so even where there is no challenge,
43 because the other party may be able to point to part of a
44 statement and say: "Well, that, even on the face of it, is
45 inherently unlikely"; whereas, if you call the witness
46 there might be a ready explanation for some inherent
47 unlikelihood ----
48
49 MR. MORRIS: The Plaintiffs have the option of cross-examining
50 and they may get nowhere with their cross-examination.
51
52 MR. JUSTICE BELL: But, quite frankly, that is not your
53 concern. You have a perfectly valid Civil Evidence Act
54 notice, even allowing for the fact (and I have not got any
55 one in mind) that here and there there may be some point
56 which could be taken. I really have to say to you again
57 what I said a few weeks ago, that the essence of the
58 allegations which the witnesses make is clear from the
59 statement and, for whatever reason, McDonald's are not
60 calling evidence to contradict it.
