Day 148 - 05 Jul 95 - Page 10
1 carries any weight at all (which we do not think it
2 should), then certainly it also needs to be canvassed that
3 the generic use of the "Mc" symbol does not mean,
4 therefore, that every heading refers to McDonald's acts but
5 to a McDonald's type of process or food, or whatever.
6
7 So that explains why we have brought that up in evidence.
8 If the Plaintiffs want to withdraw their reliance on trying
9 to inflate the meanings by reference to headings, then we
10 should have the right to bring evidence on that.
11
12 On the subject of Charles Secret, why we disclosed it late,
13 we do not have to give any reason but, out of courtesy,
14 I do not see why we should not, which is that we just
15 wanted time to read it and think about it and, as it was a
16 draft, to see whether he may wish to say anything further.
17 We did not think it was a pressing issue in the case
18 because we were on employment, or virtually about to start
19 employment.
20
21 I think that is the only comment on Mr. Rampton's
22 submissions that we have.
23
24 There was one other thing which is not on our list. We
25 thought it would be appearing on the Plaintiffs' list,
26 which is the whole matter of franchisees which the
27 Plaintiffs have raised more than halfway through the case
28 when it suited them. We would say they suddenly brought in
29 a red herring; whenever there was some negative evidence
30 that involved a franchisee, suddenly they were not
31 responsible in some way.
32
33 MR. JUSTICE BELL: In actual fact it was largely me, because
34 I did not want you to assume that a licensor would be
35 treated as responsible for things done or not done by his
36 licensee because, as a lawyer, I have a great deal of
37 difficulty with that suggestion. One would have to look at
38 the particular facts, but you are not to assume that a
39 licensor was automatically responsible for the acts of his
40 licensees.
41
42 You then gave me a little talk about how I should consider
43 it to be so, but I wanted you to be aware that you could
44 not take that for granted. That is partly how it came in.
45
46 MR. MORRIS: Yes. I think, as we have asked their lead
47 witnesses, I believe, who were quite happy to take
48 responsibility and to -----
49
50 MR. JUSTICE BELL: This is not a technical matter now, is it?
51 It is not a procedural matter. It is a matter for argument
52 in due course.
53
54 MR. MORRIS: Yes. I just wanted to say -----
55
56 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I am not going to make any ruling on that now
57 until I have listened to all the evidence and what you have
58 to say to me, if anything, at the end of the day, as to
59 McDonald's responsibility for their franchisees in, no
60 doubt, differing situations.
