Day 307 - 27 Nov 96 - Page 07
1 all the major television channels in this country, and for
2 some of the major radio channels in this country as well.
3 So, McDonald's have admitted paragraph 13 of the
4 counterclaim, thereby admitting publication of the document
5 entitled "McDonald's Restaurants and London Greenpeace",
6 which was sent out on or around 14th March 1994. So there
7 is nothing for us to prove there.
8
9 Then, in relation to paragraph 14 of the counterclaim, the
10 Second Plaintiff has published or caused to be published
11 within the jurisdiction of the court the leaflet entitled
12 "Why is McDonald's going to court". If you look at the
13 pleadings, the defence to counterclaim paragraph 3,
14 McDonald's admit to having published that leaflet and all
15 the words that are set out in paragraph 14 of the
16 counterclaim, and in the further and better particulars of
17 the defence to counterclaim dated 15th July 1994 they
18 expand on the answer that they admitted distribution of
19 that leaflet; they say that they are not able to say how
20 many customers in all read the leaflet concerned. The best
21 particulars that they can give are that 600 boxes of 500
22 leaflets were produced. So that is 300,000 defamatory
23 leaflets, we would say, that were distributed to the stores
24 around the country, with the intention that they would be
25 picked up by members of the public.
26
27 The second particular that they give in admitting
28 distribution was that one box was sent to each of the
29 Second Plaintiffs' stores, and they say that the remaining
30 70 boxes were retained and not sent to any store, although
31 what has happened to them by now we do not know. The third
32 part of that admission is that they claim that the purpose
33 of producing the leaflet was to assist franchisees and
34 restaurant managers in the event that customers
35 specifically asked about the main action so that the
36 customer could be given the leaflet in response to their
37 inquiry, and then they go on to say, "It is known that in
38 some cases (which cannot be better quantified) however, the
39 leaflet was placed in the 'did-you-know' boards of the
40 restaurant, or left lying around the restaurant".
41
42 As we know, the 'did-you-know' boards are, basically,
43 information boards in the stores where people can pick up
44 the Company's own literature.
45
46 If I just say in relation to that part of their admission,
47 the claim part of this admission, that it was produced for
48 specific inquiries sounds really quite far fetched unless
49 they were expecting to get 300,000 inquiries, which I would
50 not have thought that even they would expect to get that
51 many. So, I think that is a pointer to the fact that, in
52 reality, they were hoping that these leaflets would be
53 widely distributed to the public and they were, as they
54 have admitted they were, put in the 'did-you-know' boards
55 of a number of stores. Certainly, as I said in evidence, I
56 have seen them in a number of stores on the 'did-you-know'
57 boards and picked them up there and we know that other
58 people did too.
59
60 They say in paragraph 3 in the same pleadings, "The Second
