Day 009 - 08 Jul 94 - Page 03
1 the answers which might have been extracted -- sorry, if
I get the case which might have been put in
2 cross-examination without warning, as it were, from both
their witnesses ----
MR. JUSTICE BELL: Then you might have to consider whether at
4 some stage in the future you wanted to apply to recall a
MR. RAMPTON: Precisely, but I make no complaint about it.
MR. JUSTICE BELL: That would be a two way thing. You would
7 want to ask the witness further questions and the
defendants, who by then would have heard all their own
8 witnesses' evidence, could cross-examine further, if they
MR. RAMPTON: My Lord, yes, exactly. I do not know whether
10 that scheme appeals to your Lordship? It seems to us to
meet all concerned.
MR. MORRIS: We can see problems with it, but maybe it would be
12 better to deal with it after lunch or at the end of
MR. JUSTICE BELL: Let us get on with Mr. Langert.
MR. RAMPTON: One of our concerns, as your Lordship knows, is
15 the times when our expert witnesses can give evidence;
they have been shifted on numerous occasions; if they are
16 to be shifted again I must know today.
17 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Mr. Morris, what is the problem, in
essence? I can see many ways -- quite frankly, if I was a
18 member of the Bar concerned about whether I was going to
get up to speed with this kind of technical evidence
19 representing you, I would positively welcome it, because
it would mean I could do any cross-examination I had
20 managed to get ready for with those witnesses. I would
have heard all they had said. I would be doing perhaps
21 some essential cross-examination. I would later be
calling my witnesses, then I would, in effect, have been
22 offered the opportunity to cross-examine them a little
further later, having heard everything that my witnesses
23 said in answer to their points.
24 MISS STEEL: Are you saying that we can recall their witnesses,
if we want to?
MR. JUSTICE BELL: No. What I am saying is that if, when you
26 have called your witnesses, there are matters which they
have said in support of your case which you have not put
27 to McDonald's nutrition witnesses so they have not had an
opportunity to give their reply to them, then that is
28 really putting Mr. Rampton in the position of having to
recall his witnesses when you will have the opportunity to
29 cross-examine as well. That is the first thing.
30 The second thing is this: If, at the end of the day, even
if Mr. Rampton -- I am sure he has anticipated this -- did