Does the Statement of Claim refer to the upper echelons of the Attorney General's office?

As noted above, the article makes no reference to the plaintiffs by name. Rather, the Statement of Claim proposes that they are and would be understood to be included within the phrase: "the upper echelons of the attorney-general's office". Thus, they are implicated in the negative comments the article directs to those with that standing and responsibility. The defendants say that this understanding does not arise from the plain and ordinary meaning of the words. It is a pleading that relies on a "true" innuendo. The defendants say that this is buttressed by a plain reading of the words. Not only is there no mention of the plaintiffs by name, the words cannot refer to the plaintiffs. Taken as a whole, the words say that the "upper echelons of the attorney-general's office intentionally sabotaged the case by refusing to give prosecutor's the resources they needed to bring the case to trial in a timely manner". The plaintiffs were the prosecutors. Accordingly, to say that the plaintiffs are, by a reading of the words in their natural and ordinary meaning, part of the “upper echelons of the attorney-general's office” is to say that they denied themselves the necessary funding. This, the defendants say, is not how the ordinary and reasonable reader, even one with specialized knowledge, would understand these words (see: Morgan v. Odhams Press Ltd. and another, [1971] 2 All E.R. 1156 at p. 1162).