TWO girls from Wilmslow are among a host of customers who have lost their claim against burger giants McDonalds for serving scalding drinks.
The compensation claim was made by 36 customers who sustained burns from hot tea or coffee served in the fast food restaurants between April 1996 and August 1998.
Their lawyers claimed the drinks were served too hot and in cups that were inappropriate and "defective" under the terms of the Consumer Protection Act 1987.
But Mr Justice Field cleared McDonalds of all legal liability to compensate those injured.
Tim Horlock QC, represented the 36, including Katherine Smith, of Ashford Road, Wilmslow, who was eight months old when spilt tea burnt her forearm in a McDonalds in Macclesfield in January 1998.
He also represented Courtney Eyres, of Northward Road, Wilmslow, who was three when hot black coffee was spilt on to her stomach during a trip to McDonalds in Stockport.
Mr Horlock had told Mr Justice Field during the hearing: "The type of cup used by McDonalds had a very high thermal efficiency which not only prevents significant cooling before consumption, but also does not provide the consumer with a sensory understanding of the temperature of the contents."
But Mr Justice Field disagreed, saying: "I hold that the safety of the hot drinks met the legitimate expectations."
Eal401 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (13 years 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 2611 times:
Exactly how hot are these drinks? I don't know about you but when I make tea or coffee for myself, I use boiling water. Or at least what my kettle passes off as boiling water, i.e. between 90-95 degrees most likely.
What these people are really doing is suing because they are so stupid and incapable, they cannot have a drink without spilling it. An eight month old baby gets tea spilt onto its arm? Not McDonald's fault, the person spilling the tea is at fault.
Maybe McDonalds should start issuing bibs to people when they order hot drinks.
Artsyman From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4747 posts, RR: 33
Reply 3, posted (13 years 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 2592 times:
I know one of the lawyers that worked in the mirror case of this in the states, and there are a few interesting points of note.
1.Coffee needs to be served at a specific temperature to correctly extract some flavours from the bean.
2. Only a few establishments in the world actually bother to serve coffee at the temperature that it is supposed to be served at.
3. There are plenty of coffee enthuisiasts that will specifically go and order McDonalds coffee for this reason.
4. McDonalds makes more money from the amount of people that specifically go to McDonalds for coffee, than they lose in lawsuits for people claiming burn injuries. Therefore they continue to serve it piping hot.
Most people seem not to think about that last point. It isnt a difficult thing to serve the coffee a little cooler, and if McDonalds didn't have a real benefit to doing it, they would be serving luke warm coffee like the rest of them.
McDonalds makes 2 million dollars profit per day from Coffee alone.
JetService From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 4798 posts, RR: 11
Reply 12, posted (13 years 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 2498 times:
Acidradio, its only artery-clogging for some people. For others, it is not. Depends on your body. Perhaps McDonalds should screen its customers. Only serve to people that metabolize cholesterol quickly! Nah, then they'd get sued for discrimination!
I like Eal401's idea better. Be responsible or wear a 'Dummy' T-shirt.