Day 099 - 08 Mar 95 - Page 70
1 least four of the buns were mouldy blue. Again I pointed
2 this out to the grill team leader and to the floor manager.
3 It was at the height of the lunch-time rush when there
4 was pressure to keep producing is intense. Again both the
5 grill team leader and the floor manager shrugged".
6
7 MR. JUSTICE BELL: What I am asking you to do is produce
8 something or point me to something which relates a mouldy
9 bun to food poisoning. I can see that there is evidence
10 about bacteria in meat of various kinds, pathogenic
11 bacteria. I am prepared to take judicial notice that if
12 raw sewage got on to food somehow or other, as it might do
13 if it was slopping around the kitchen floor the same might
14 happen. I do not know of anything in your statements, but
15 if I have missed it please refer me to it, which suggests
16 because of mouldy buns or rotten lettuce there is a risk or
17 incident of food poisoning. It is not the way the pleading
18 in the Abstract appears, but if there is some suggestion of
19 food poisoning or a risk of food poisoning arising from
20 rotten lettuce or mouldy buns in your witness statements
21 somewhere or documentation, refer me to it.
22
23 Everyone, for instance, has eaten mouldy bread at some time
24 without realising it, without any adverse effect at all.
25 I am not prepared to go along the line of saying there is a
26 risk food poisoning from a mouldy bun. I just do not know
27 and you have to show that it appears in such a way that it
28 can be taken as being pleaded as such under the loose
29 arrangement which was made.
30
31 MS. STEEL: It reflects on the company's standards of hygiene
32 and the kind of products they are prepared to use. If time
33 is short or they are in a rush period, then they are
34 prepared to be slack on what are their so-called standards.
35
36 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I do not accept that. We are on what has
37 fairly and accurately described as "food poisoning" and
38 I want to stick to that. The line must be drawn
39 somewhere. There is lots of material on food poisoning
40 which can fairly be said to relate to what appears in the
41 leaflet, but there has to be a boundary somewhere.
42
43 MR. MORRIS: I would say that the thrust of McDonald's
44 defence -- not defence -- it is a defence in terms of the
45 counterclaim, the evidence they have given is about their
46 standards and checks they claim dominate their procedures
47 and if that is all irrelevant to food poisoning -----
48
49 MR. JUSTICE BELL: No, they are not irrelevant to food
50 poisoning, but they are relevant to food poisoning within
51 the boundaries which I have tried to set out. Meat
52 products, microbiology, all that I understand. As I have
53 said, I am prepared to consider raw sewage in the kitchen
54 and how that arises from an employee's statement rather
55 than someone who is specifically a food poisoning witness.
56 That is my ruling, Mr. Morris. You must abide by it. You
57 have plenty to ask about on the relevant matters.
58
59 What I am most interested in in cross-examination, because
60 I have still to hear your witnesses, is where you challenge
