Day 053 - 22 Nov 94 - Page 05
1 in any event the leaflet states "link" and the pleadings
2 stated "link" and, therefore, we should only have to prove
3 what was stated, and that is "link".
4
5 In relation to that, I mean, I would say that where the
6 word "cause" has been used by our witnesses or where we may
7 have asked the Plaintiffs' witnesses about "cause", that
8 does not mean that we recognised that "cause" was the
9 issue. As I say, if we prove "cause", then it means that
10 link is proved. So, it goes to proving what is in the
11 pleadings now.
12
13 In order to further explain what was meant by "link",
14 "association" and "relationship" in our pleadings, as you
15 asked us to do yesterday, I would just explain that the
16 reason the word "link" was used in our pleadings was
17 because the word was used in the fact sheet which is the
18 subject of the action, and it was also used in the
19 Statement of Claim.
20
21 In relation to the fact sheet, obviously, we did not write
22 it, so it is difficult for us to know exactly what the
23 person who wrote it intended.
24
25 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes. In a sense, assuming that you did not
26 write it, that might put you in a better position to argue
27 what it would mean to the ordinary man or woman in the
28 street, because -- and no doubt I will be corrected in due
29 course -- my understanding is that it does not matter, so
30 far as deciding what the meaning of the words is, what the
31 person who wrote them thought they meant or intended them
32 to mean; it is the picture they paint to the ordinary
33 reader. So, in a sense, not having written them, as you
34 say, you are not contaminated with what it was intended to
35 say. You might be able to look at them and say, "What does
36 it actually mean", bearing in mind not just the extracts
37 you have read but, in case I decide it is relevant, the
38 headlines and the cartoon, for instance.
39
40 MS. STEEL: Yes. I am going to go come on to that later on.
41 What we would submit is that it is very likely that the
42 person or persons who wrote the leaflet used the word
43 "link" because that was the word used in reports by
44 scientific bodies, in Health Authority booklets, and things
45 like that, on the state of knowledge in relation to diet
46 and disease.
47
48 If that is the case, then we feel it would be manifestly
49 unfair to require us to prove something stronger than
50 that. We feel that, looked at in context of the leaflet,
51 it is clear that the leaflet is saying that McDonald's are
52 trying to make out that their food is healthy, i.e. a
53 useful and nutritious part of any diet, when the evidence
54 points to the opposite; and that is the evidence of a link.
55
56 The word "association" in the pleadings was taken from
57 scientific journals and, hence, represents the view of at
58 least some (and, we would contend, the majority) of those
59 in the scientific community.
60
