Day 002 - 29 Jun 94 - Page 21

     
     1        of Montecillos Co-operative, which is at the centre of our
              case.
     2
              I cannot see what the problem is.  It goes to malice, but
     3        I was bringing it in at this stage because I was going to
              talk about discovery obligations as regarding this
     4        particular situation.  Here we have a possible -- maybe
              McDonald's do not realise they were getting meat from
     5        Montecillos Coope.  This is one of the purposes of
              discovery.  That is why I brought it up under this point.
     6        I was going to talk, after this is shown, about discovery
              that we are seeking on this point, to explain how
     7        discovery applications are related to the evidence in the
              case.  This film is evidence at least to malice and to the
     8        counterclaim.  Sergio Quintana is the chap interviewed.
 
     9   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  He was not the one behind the desk?
 
    10   MR. MORRIS:  No.
 
    MR. JUSTICE BELL:  The one in the white kit? How do you spell
              his surname?
    12
         MR. MORRIS:  Q-U-I-N-T-A-N-A.
    13
         MR. RAMPTON:  My Lord, it is perfectly right that it is, in
    14        theory, open to the defendants to seek to persuade your
              Lordship in due course that that evidence is relevant to
    15        their state of mind in that, despite all the vast amount
              of material we have given them, they might seek to
    16        persuade your Lordship they really prefer what was in the
              film, even though it was shown as long ago as 1988.
    17
              Howsoever, at this moment I would seek to persuade your
    18        Lordship that the matter, if it is to be shown now, could
              only be shown on the basis that it were made distinctly
    19        clear that the defendants do not assert that what that man
              says is true.  Second, that it has no bearing on the
    20        question of discovery.
 
         There is something in general I would wish to say about
              discovery.  Miss Steel and Mr. Morris have repeatedly
    22        said, not only in this court but in their recent leaflets,
              that McDonald's have been guilty of a cover up; that they
    23        have persistently failed to disclose documents which would
              show the truth of the allegations made in the leaflet.
    24
              I have remained patient until now but, as your Lordship
    25        knows, that allegation is simply without any foundation
              whatsoever.  I should wish at some stage before the end of 
    26        today to have the opportunity perhaps through your 
              Lordship of making that clear because these are sound 
    27        bites, if I may call them, that are issued by the
              defendants for the consumption of the press.  These
    28        plaintiffs now (and have always known) what their
              obligations of discovery are.
    29
         MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I am not going to rule on discovery.  I do
    30        not feel it is necessary.  I will hear any argument there
              is about discovery in due course.  I propose to give my