Day 287 - 25 Oct 96 - Page 19
1 only speculate. So, they are not insignificant, even in
2 Germany.
3
4 His conclusion that there is no causal relationship between
5 the production and consumption of hamburgers, on the one
6 hand, and the expansion areas under cultivation for soya
7 beans in the world or in Brazil, on the other hand, is the
8 conclusion he was told, we believe, obviously told to make,
9 and it does not really bear any relation with the
10 information that he provides. So, that is an expert
11 opinion which there is no evidence that he is entitled to
12 make. While it is clear that he is an expert on the German
13 feed industry, there is no evidence of any kind that he
14 knows anything about the effect that would have in Brazil.
15 Anyway, people can draw their own conclusions from the
16 facts that we accept in there. He concentrates on the
17 1980s, but this case has concentrated on the 1980s. So,
18 whatever has happened today in Germany on this subject is
19 immaterial.
20
21 In fact, the statement of Douglas Gulang that, suddenly,
22 McDonald's cattle in Germany seem to be eating all
23 Argentinian soya rather than Brazilian soya, is clearly
24 contradicted by what Mr. Cesca said about them all being
25 typical. So, it is just bizarre, if you ask me.
26
27 If I can just say in conclusion that although court time
28 has not really been used up on this issue, very much court
29 time, it is just as well, because we would say that
30 McDonald's made admission before the trial even started on
31 21st April 1994, pages 44 and 45, where Mr. Rampton said
32 that Douglas Gulang "...has traced back the whole of what
33 might be called the soya bean chain from its ending up
34 point, which is McDonald's in Germany, right the way back
35 down to the original producers in Brazil in one sense"; and
36 that they were, I think, at that time preparing a statement
37 on this subject. Then he says: "The result of it all, when
38 we get a copy of his statement, the result of it all is
39 that McDonald's cows" -- and I note the phrase "McDonald's
40 cows" -- "which are not grown for beef anyway but for meal,
41 if they are lucky, get about two percent of their food in
42 the form of soya meal."
43
44 I think that one reason that the Plaintiffs were bringing
45 statements to court was that they were doing that as an
46 alternative to having to provide discovery on the subject.
47 It was put forward as an alternative to discovery, which is
48 the application which was being made.
49
50 Finally, if we can just remind the court that Mr. Nicholson
51 gave answers to interrogatories in May 1994.
52 Question: "Did not McDonald's in Germany or any other
53 branch....."
54
55 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Which question is that?
56
57 MR. MORRIS: Question X -- 10; it is a Roman 10.
58
59 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes.
60
