Day 042 - 31 Oct 94 - Page 43


     
     1        one hundred per cent, which is why the evidence on
     2        advertising, in my respectful submission, is only really of
     3        importance in this case if it be asserted that its quality
     4        is deceptive, because, by that route, if the Defendants
     5        were right -- of course, our contention is that they are
     6        one hundred per cent wrong -- not only would you be getting
     7        people into restaurants to damage their health, you would
     8        be getting them in by dishonest means.
     9
    10   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Dishonest, or exerting undue pressure in such
    11        a way-----
    12
    13   MR. RAMPTON:  Inappropriate, improper, whatever the word might
    14        be.  But, so far as we can see, the only relevance of the
    15        evidence that Mr. Hawkes and Mr. Green will follow is
    16        really to this extent -- it has two aspects to it:  one is
    17        whether the advertising, objectively judged, which I doubt
    18        is a question of evidence at all, beyond what your Lordship
    19        can see-----
    20
    21   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I have to make for myself what I see of that,
    22        have I not?
    23
    24   MR. RAMPTON:  Yes, exactly.
    25
    26   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Subject to any argument by the Defendants.
    27
    28   MR. RAMPTON:  Of course.
    29
    30   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I might go either way on it.  I have already
    31        indicated that I am as surprised as they, that those were
    32        children's raspberries, rather than real racing cars, on my
    33        own impression.
    34
    35   MR. RAMPTON:  Of course.  But then a further question is: in
    36        fact, does a little child expect a little plastic car to
    37        make a real racing car noise?  Those are matters for your
    38        Lordship; they are not questions of evidence.  The question
    39        which is a question for evidence is what McDonald's intent
    40        is in relation to this advertising.  Your Lordship has it
    41        plainly from this witness, and from me by way of aside --
    42        and I hope we will hear from Mr. Green -- that the purpose
    43        of advertising is to sell more food, whether it be by the
    44        direct route of the adult or the indirect route of the
    45        child.  There is no issue about that.
    46
    47        What I would respectfully suggest the Defendants ought to
    48        be focusing on in relation to these witnesses, so that we
    49        do not spend what I call unnecessary time in court, is
    50        whether or not McDonald's intend to deceive the viewer, the 
    51        reader of the advertisement, by what they put out, rather 
    52        than making speeches to your Lordship, as it were, through 
    53        the television set, about the actual quality of the
    54        advertising.
    55
    56   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Yes.  If I might say so, concentrate on
    57        aspects which you think are actually proper in the sense of
    58        putting undue pressure or deceiving.  Bear in mind that you
    59        can argue to me what impression a particular ad makes in
    60        due course.  By all means, if you wish, you can ask

Prev Next Index