Day 240 - 24 Apr 96 - Page 06

     
     1
     2   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  There we are.  Point out the other
     3        paragraphs.
     4
     5   MR. MORRIS:  Then that is of significance.  It is a fact
     6        independent from the court case.
     7
     8   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  It is argument for you in due course to say
     9        it is significant.
    10
    11   MR. MORRIS:  You have to be able to say, I think it is
    12        significant if my members ----
    13
    14   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Carry on and point out to the others matters.
    15
    16   MR. MORRIS:  The last paragraph after the word "therefore",
    17        starting with, "It is my considered view that McDonald's
    18        are unable to categorically prove" et cetera down to "the
    19        end of 1986" which refers to his overall experience in the
    20        field.  Helen has some.
    21
    22   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Yes, Ms. Steel?
    23
    24   MS. STEEL:  Obviously I adopt what Mr. Morris has said.  The
    25        additional points that I want to raise are on page 4, the
    26        first paragraph that you have mentioned about "during the
    27        1970s".
    28
    29        As I understand it, it is standard practice for expert
    30        witnesses to give conclusions based on their knowledge of
    31        the industry and the facts and obviously you do not have to
    32        accept that, but we have had that with all the other expert
    33        witnesses so far.  Usually there are conflicting opinions.
    34
    35   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Do not say anything more about that
    36        paragraph.  What other ones?.
    37
    38   MS. STEEL:  The next one is on page 5, the third paragraph.  It
    39        is slightly different.  It actually starts with, "I have
    40        read the submission made by Mr. Cesca" and he is commenting
         on the evidence of Mr. Cesca.  I think that is, as far as
    42        I am aware, fairly standard practice for expert witnesses
    43        to comment on the evidence given by other witnesses and
    44        I certainly recall it in relation to Mr. Purslow commenting
    45        on all the evidence of the employees in the store, and
    46        again it is up to you what weight you want to attach to
    47        that, or whether you agree with it or whatever, but it is
    48        standard practice for expert witnesses to comment on other
    49        evidence given by other witnesses, to comment on it based
    50        upon their knowledge of the industry, their expertise of 
    51        that particular area. 
    52 
    53        The third one that I want to refer to is on page 6, the
    54        third paragraph, "In the continued absence of such proof".
    55        Mr. Secrett is commenting on the correspondence between
    56        himself and McDonald's, and obviously McDonald's are
    57        asserting that it is all true and he is entitled to say
    58        that based on the evidence put in front of him at those
    59        meetings and in those letters, he does not agree.
    60