Day 279 - 12 Jul 96 - Page 07
1 did fax this to the plaintiffs this morning about half past
2 eight.
3
4 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Do you want to tell me what you have to say
5 about Miss Clauphine Carston?
6
7 MS. STEEL: I was going to go through the parts in "unhappy
8 meals" that I wanted to rely on as hearsay statements,
9 which was how this originally came up and when we said that
10 we wanted to rely on some of the quotes. Mr. Rampton said
11 that we would have to get a statement from the author of
12 the article to confirm that those were correct quotes,
13 which is what Miss Clauphine Carston's statement is for.
14 It is in tab 116 of the defendant's original list of
15 documents, and it does relate directly to one of the
16 pleadings. I mean, obviously, she confirms the whole
17 article, but the parts which are relevant is firstly on
18 page 34, and I think this bit is actually mentioned in her
19 statement, but I am not 100 per cent sure, but this is what
20 she witnessed herself.
21
22 MR. JUSTICE BELL: But are you suggesting that this is in a
23 different category to Miss Clauphine Carston's statement?
24
25 MS. STEEL: I am not sure what you mean.
26
27 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I am very happy you should refer me to the
28 parts you would want to rely on, but are you suggesting
29 that I can take any of this article into account as
30 admissible in evidence free standing from Miss Clauphine
31 Carston? Because I have got to decide whether any parts of
32 Miss Clauphine Carston's letter to you, her Civil Evidence
33 Act statement, can go in. I have heard Mr. Rampton on that
34 and I will hear you and Mr. Morris on that. What I am
35 checking is whether that is the end of it, or you are
36 suggesting that any parts of this article are actually
37 admissible in evidence in their own right? I understand
38 that the article is in the bundle so that, I cannot
39 remember whether it was Miss Gomez Gonzales now, but
40 McDonald's witness might be cross-examined about it to see
41 whether you obtained any concession in relation to it. So,
42 I am not complaining about the article being in the
43 bundle. But what I am asking is, do you suggest it is
44 admissible in anyway as evidence of the truth of what is
45 set out in it?
46
47 MS. STEEL: Yes. At the time we did say that we wanted to put a
48 Civil Evidence Act notice, the quotes, in the article, and
49 Mr. Rampton said that if we wanted to do that we had to
50 get, or if we wanted to we could do that but if we wanted
51 it to have any weight at all we would need the author of
52 the article to confirm that that was an accurate record of
53 what was said by those people. So, that is what we did.
54 We got a statement from the author of the article to
55 confirm that those statements in the article are accurate.
56 They were made by inspectors at the Monfort plant that
57 supplies McDonald's meat inspectors.
58
59 If I just go through the article.
60
