Day 084 - 07 Feb 95 - Page 03

     
     1        another way, the person who has the document says: "What do
     2        you want it for?" can they say:  "Well, that is none of
     3        your business; I am entitled to a copy"?
     4
     5        Again just to help you, what I think we have actually got
     6        to do is look at any document or class of document you
     7        particularly fix on, and then we have to apply the
     8        principles of my ruling to it.  That will then tell you
     9        whether the document is considered by me to be within the
    10        power of the First or Second Plaintiff, and we then go on
    11        to consider whether it should be discovered.
    12
    13   MR. MORRIS:  So, just to clarify because this may relate to all
    14        the applications or some of the applications:  Is our
    15        submission accepted, that the effect of their contractual
    16        relationship with their suppliers, where they include a
    17        clause about inspection of documents and they do not
    18        specify any restriction on that, is that taken to mean
    19        that in those cases that would mean that the documents in
    20        that particular supplier's possession will be in
         power -----
    22
    23   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I have not actually ruled on that.  I could
    24        have gone on to rule on the argument so far; I have chosen
    25        not to because I thought you should have the benefit of
    26        knowing what my ruling is on principle in case you wanted
    27        to argue anything further.
    28
    29   MR. MORRIS:  Because that is going to apply to some of the
    30        documents we are going to be asking for -- we can go
    31        through and obviously it will come up, or we could deal
    32        with it now and then we know what the situation is.
    33
    34   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  You have the opportunity today or, at least,
    35        if it is thought desirable that we should get on with
    36        Mr. Atherton at 2 o'clock, to go through, refer to
    37        documents or specific classes of documents which you would
    38        argue, being faithful to the ruling I have made on what
    39        power involves, are within the power of the First
    40        Plaintiffs.  If they are not within the power of the First
         or Second Plaintiffs, that is that, so far as discovery is
    42        concerned.
    43
    44        If they are within the power of the First or Second
    45        Plaintiffs, the next issue is whether they are relevant.
    46        Then the next issue, leaving aside who has to establish it,
    47        is if they are relevant, whether their production for you
    48        to inspect and take copies of, if you wish, is necessary
    49        for the fair disposal of the case or saving costs.  From
    50        now on I may well not add the words "and saving cost" 
    51        because it is the fair disposal of the case which is mostly 
    52        involved, although Mr. Rampton may well argue that the 
    53        effort and cost involved is not worth any small advantage
    54        one may get evidentially.
    55
    56   MR. MORRIS:  It is just that as soon as I start going through
    57        the documents, we are going to face the immediate decision
    58        on -- obviously, we would submit that your ruling, the
    59        contracts between, for example, the McDonald's Corporation
    60        and Costa Rica McDonald's, effectively, they are part of