Day 308 - 28 Nov 96 - Page 16
1 was used by McDonald's in an attempt to discredit us,
2 despite the fact that London Greenpeace was the original
3 Greenpeace group in this country and is a respected
4 organisation. They continued to use that letter even
5 though Greenpeace Limited had asked them not to.
6
7 I have not had time to look up all the references for this,
8 but it was discussed during the evidence of Mr. Preston.
9
10 The other point, which I want to go through in a bit more
11 detail, is that we are relying on the fact that on a number
12 of occasions representatives of McDonald's UK, including
13 Mike Love, who is Head of Communications and who is also
14 responsible for the leaflet complained of in the
15 counterclaim, they have stated to the media and to others
16 that the Company is not seeking damages and costs in this
17 case; and that is despite the fact that McDonald's has
18 never dropped that part of its claim from the main action
19 and it is, therefore, still seeking costs and damages.
20
21 We would say that the only logical inference that can be
22 drawn from that, the reason for making that statement is to
23 lessen potential sympathy for our case and thereby lessen
24 assistance from the public in the form of donations --
25 McDonald's knowing that we are reliant on those donations.
26
27 Also, they have made a suggestion that we are lying for
28 saying that they are seeking costs and damages.
29
30 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Where was that?
31
32 MS. STEEL: It has been in various press reports. Actually,
33 I do not know whether or not it has been in any of the ones
34 that we have put in court. It has been something that has
35 been said to us by numerous journalists, and I have seen it
36 reported in places.
37
38 MR. JUSTICE BELL: You know -----
39
40 MS. STEEL: I will see if I can find it.
41
42 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I pointedly asked the question because what
43 I want to know is whether I have evidence of it.
44
45 MS. STEEL: Right. If it has not come out in the evidence, then
46 I am sorry for mentioning it. But it is still the truth,
47 but, obviously, you cannot take any account of it.
48
49 MR. MORRIS: I think the point about them saying that in their
50 letters is to undermine our credibility. If we are saying
51 the truth about the Plaintiffs are applying for costs and
52 damages -- which obviously they are -- then it makes us
53 look stupid when McDonald's are denying that they are.
54
55 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes.
56
57 MS. STEEL: I will just briefly refer you to the references for
58 this. In tab 9 of supplementary list 9, the letter to
59 Mr. George Galloway MP, House of Commons, dated
60 3rd July 1995, from Mike Love, states on the second page:
