Day 005 - 04 Jul 94 - Page 02

     
     1                                                4th July, 1994.
                               Mr. Preston recalled.
     2                  Cross-Examined by the defendants.
 
     3   MR. MORRIS:  Just one matter before we start cross-examination,
              was that Mr. Rampton said last week that a copy of the
     4        London Greenpeace fact sheet had been given to somebody in
              the court and he was going to make some reliance on that.
     5        We have been advised that the document is privileged once
              it has been read out in court and it can go to members of
     6        the press.  Obviously we want to do it for their
              understanding of the issues and proper reporting.
     7
              So can we just clarify that that is the case, so if we
     8        wish to we can give it to members of the press that are in
              court?
     9
         MR. JUSTICE BELL:  What do you say the position is,
    10        Mr. Rampton?
 
    MR. RAMPTON:  There is no doubt that my learned friend, the
              press or anyone else who is in court is entitled to know
    12        what the words complained of are in the action.  The event
              to which I take exception -- I am not suggesting any kind
    13        of contempt of court or anything similar, but merely that
              it fuels what we say in relation to the injunction in
    14        relation to malice and the defence to counterclaim; that
              distribution to passing tourists who take the thing out of
    15        court to read at their leisure perhaps in their hotel room
              is something I am entitled to rely on -- that is all.
    16
         MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Yes.  I do not think it is suggested that
    17        you are in contempt of court.  If it is established that
              you did take a part in the publication of the leaflet and
    18        if it is established that it is defamatory and your claim
              of justification or of fair comment were to fail, then
    19        Mr. Rampton, as you know, on behalf of McDonald's will ask
              me to make an order next forbidding any further
    20        publication of it.
 
         What he, as I understand it, is suggesting that if you are
              seen to be handing it out for people to take away from the
    22        court, then that could be taken evidence of a wish further
              to publicise it.
    23
         MR. MORRIS:  Yes.  I just want to clarify the situation.  We
    24        are entitled to give it out to people inside the court or
              just the press?  What is the situation?
    25
         MR. JUSTICE BELL:  You must really make your own mind up.  What 
    26        I suggest you do is talk -- you do not actually have a 
              McKenzie friend here? 
    27
         MR. MORRIS:  No.
    28
         MR. JUSTICE BELL:  It is entirely a matter for you.  You have a
    29        Legal advice on occasion available to you.  I would take
              Legal advise.  I am quite happy to help you about the
    30        mechanics of the hearing and give you advice on that.
              What I feel uneasy about is giving you advice as if you