Day 001 - 28 Jun 94 - Page 14


     
     1        My Lord, in the light of my reading of that pamphlet in
              that way, your Lordship may not find it difficult to see
     2        why it is that the plaintiffs brought this action.  It is,
              your Lordship may conclude at the end of the case, a
     3        wholesale attack on almost every aspect of the plaintiffs'
              business which, if it were accepted as being true, would
     4        necessarily cause McDonald's an enormous amount of damage.
 
     5        As I have indicated to your Lordship, I will have to go
              into the matter in a little more detail later on.  It is,
     6        on the plaintiffs' case, completely false in every
              material respect.  It is that truth which by bringing this
     7        action McDonald's hopes to establish.
 
     8        My Lord, it is right that I tell your Lordship something
              about the history of the action.  Earlier versions of this
     9        leaflet, or something like it, have been in existence for
              some considerable time, perhaps since 1983 or 1984.  The
    10        contents of the leaflet, or the substance of it, have been
              repeated or reflected from time to time in various places
    11        and by different people.  Each time that has occurred
              McDonald's has taken action to prevent a recurrence and
    12        usually with a degree of success.
 
    13        A copy of this actual leaflet first came into the
              possession of the second plaintiff, the UK subsidiary, in
    14        October 1987.  The occasion was a demonstration outside
              the second plaintiffs head office in East Finchley in
    15        London on 16th October 1987 which succeeded similar
              demonstrations in 1985 and 1986.
    16
              The demonstration was organised by a group called, or
    17        rather, I would say, calling itself Greenpeace (London).
              The second plaintiffs, when they got hold of the leaflet,
    18        decided they should try to find out what or who this group
              actually consisted of, who its leaders were and what its
    19        aims were.
 
    20        Mr. Sydney Nicholson, who is a senior officer of the
              plaintiffs and a former senior policeman, tried to find
    21        out for himself but did not succeed.  The leaflet was
              distributed again on 16th October 1988 and copies were
    22        available later that night on 29th October at the
              Greenpeace (London) Anti-McDonald's Fayre held at Conway
    23        Hall in London.
 
    24        My Lord, thus far, 1984 to 1988, repetition of the
              leaflet's allegations had been sporadic and fairly
    25        limited, partly because McDonald's had taken action to
              prevent the poison spreading.  In 1988, however, something 
    26        of a change occurred.  From about June similar allegations 
              began to appear with an alarming frequency in what one 
    27        might call mainstream or respectable media, both national
              and local.
    28
              Then in early October items began to appear in the media
    29        which anticipated the Greenpeace (London) anti-McDonald's
              day fixed for 16th of that month which repeated or
    30        re-produced allegations made in the leaflet.  After that
              date, 16th October 1989, the leaflet's allegations were

Prev Next Index