COMMENTS GENERALLY

1. REQUEST FOR FURTHER AND BETTER PARTICULARS OF THE PARTICULARS OF

"Further or in the alternative, the words complained of are fair comment on matters of public interest, namely the conduct and practices of the first Plaintiff as a major corporation, operating and franchising restaurants throughout the world, and the conduct and practices of the Second Defendant in managing fast-food restaurants in the United Kingdom. In so far as it may be necessary the Defendants will rely on section 6 of the Defamation Act 1952.

Particulars of fair comment will be served separately." Specifying, in relation to each Plaintiff, the defamatory comments which the Defendants seek to support.

ANSWER

That the more one finds out about the First and Second Plaintiffs the less attractive they become.

That images of 'Third World' poverty, often used by charities, divert attention from one cause, namely exploitation by multinationals such as the First and Second Plaintiffs.

That the First and Second Plaintiffs search endlessly for more and more profit. Further, that by eating the food of the First and Second Plaintiffs one helps them wreck the planet.

Most people regard processed burgers and synthetic chips, served in paper and plastic containers as 'junk-food'. Further, that it is a sign of the junk-quality of Big Macs that people actually hold competitions to see who can eat one in the shortest time. Further, that the craving experienced by some people for the food of the First and Second Plaintiffs could lead to constipation, clogged arteries and heart attacks. Further, that the lettuce leaves of the First and Second Plaintiffs are so treated that they might as well be plastic.

What's wrong with McDonald's is also wrong with the other fast food chains such as Wimpy, Kentucky and Wendy etc.