"Between paras. 32 and 37 of the defence, the defendants deal with restrictions on advertising. At para. 24 of the reply, each of the particulars relied upon by the defendants at paras. 32 to 37, and each and every alleged fact asserted therein as justifying the provisions of s. 33A of the Act, is denied. That denial appears to be inconsistent, to some extent at least, with the approach of the plaintiffs concerning admissions relating to other parts of the defence. That was accepted by counsel on behalf of the plaintiffs, who indicated that an appropriate amendment would be made so as to make admissions of the relevant facts contained between paras. 32 and 37. They would include, e.g. the assertion that there were reasonable grounds for the legislature to consider that more comprehensive restrictions on the advertising of tobacco products would better protect children and young people. They would also deal with its entitlements to have regard to the factors set out at paras. 35 (a) through (d), namely the report of the Tobacco Free Policy Groups' conclusions that the tobacco industry exploited the immaturity of young people when marketing their tobacco products; that advertising plays an important role in the promotion of tobacco products to young people; the 1999 Joint Committee Report statement that research demonstrates that 34 % of children in the 15 to 17 year age bracket smoke and that a significant number of children commence smoking at an age when they are not lawfully permitted to be sold cigarettes. On the present state of the pleadings, it appears to me, that the defendants are entitled to adduce evidence in relation to these matters but if an appropriate amendment as outlined by counsel in the course of argument were to be forthcoming, then obviously those facts would be rendered not to be in issue and evidence would not be permissible on them."