Day 060 - 02 Dec 94 - Page 07
1 to him is really a comment which you can address to me, if
2 you wish.
3
4 MR. RAMPTON: I was interested to hear the question. It is not
5 a question that I see can be derived sensibly from the
6 article, still less am I aware there is any underlying
7 factual basis for the question.
8
9 MR. MORRIS: That is why I was trying to ask the witness, as he
10 says, he thinks it is an accurate report of the situation.
11
12 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Leave it there, because he said he does not
13 know. You may say it looks as if they consider that waste
14 of various kinds is a sufficient problem to want to levy a
15 tax on those they think are responsible in order to recoup
16 some of the expense involved, if that is what it amounts
17 to. This witness has said he cannot help you in relation
18 to Germany, or Kassel in particular.
19
20 MR. MORRIS: Did you make enquiries last night as to the
21 accuracy of this?
22 A. Last night, no, I did not last night.
23
24 Q. Or any time?
25 A. I have talked to my colleagues in Germany from time to
26 time.
27
28 Q. About this?
29 A. I understand that the Berlin Court decision was
30 interim, that McDonald's are still in court in Kassel, and
31 that the Appeal Court has yet to decide whether McDonald's
32 can appeal or not. That is the current situation, as
33 I understand it.
34
35 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I think what you are really being asked --
36 perhaps I could put it to you quite shortly -- is whether a
37 tax was imposed by the City of Kassel of the kind of nature
38 which is shown in that article, and there have been court
39 proceedings as to whether it is legally valid or not?
40 A. I can answer that, my Lord.
41
42 Q. Is the answer to that "yes"?
43 A. A tax was imposed but has never been paid, as this is
44 the subject of an appeal.
45
46 MR. MORRIS: So McDonald's have refused to pay the tax, have
47 they?
48 A. They have said they will go to appeal.
49
50 Q. Apart from the refusal to pay it, do you not think that
51 companies should take responsibility for the huge expense
52 that local councils have to incur for collecting the
53 rubbish, either as environment/index.html">litter or as disposable sacks from
54 behind restaurants, and disposing of it and monitoring it
55 for possibly hundreds or thousands of years in landfill
56 sites? Do you not think that companies should take
57 responsibility for their obligations they have created,
58 their choice?
59 A. If I can correct you. McDonald's have not refused to
60 pay this tax. The community of Kassel has not imposed the
