McLibel: Burger chain wins libel case in PR disaster FRIDAY JUNE 20 1997 By John Mason, Law Courts Correspondent The long-running McDonald's libel action against two environmental activists ended yesterday in London's High Court with the US fast-food company and its UK subsidiary achieving a qualified legal victory but being left with a public relations disaster. After a 313-day trial, the longest in English legal history, the judge ruled that most of the criticisms of McDonald's business practices made in a protest group's leaflet were untrue and awarded the companies damages of £60,000 ($97,800). McDonald's decision to bring libel proceedings against Ms Helen Steel and Mr David Morris, has proved controversial and led to increased international campaigning against the company. The allegations made in the leaflet produced by London Greenpeace, a group unrelated to the larger Greenpeace organisation, included claims that McDonald's destroyed rainforests and contributed to Third World starvation, its food was a health risk and the companies exploited their workforces. Mr Justice Bell, the judge, said the bulk of these were unjustified. However, he ruled against the companies on some issues, deciding they exploited children in their advertising, were cruel to animals and, in the case of the UK subsidiary, placed unfair pressure on young employees. After the judgment, McDonald's faced criticism from the legal and public relations professions that it had done itself more harm than good by bringing the action. Mr Stephen Brocklebank-Fowler, managing director of London public relations company Citygate Corporate, said: "McDonald's has scored one of the most extended own-goals in the recent history of public relations." Mrs Sarah Webb, a lawyer specialising in libel with London law firm Russell Jones & Walker, said: "It cannot be seen as a resounding success. The aspects of the case they have lost will be damaging to the companies while the scale of the damages they have won has to be considered small." McDonald's decision to bring libel proceedings prompted considerable adverse publicity, including the creation of an internet site on which the allegations are repeated. Mr Paul Preston, president of McDonald's UK, said the companies had been forced to protect the McDonald's brand. McDonald's said it would pursue the defendants for the damages awards but not to the point of driving either to bankruptcy. Mr Preston said: "This is about reputation, not money." Mr Morris and Miss Steel pledged to continue their campaign. They plan to take their case to the European Court of Human Rights to challenge the UK's "oppressive" libel laws.
		© Copyright the Financial Times Limited 1997 "FT" and "Financial Times" are trademarks of The Financial Times Limited.

Follow-up report from the BBC, 5 July 2000: "Two campaigners, who were involved in the longest libel case in English legal history against the fast food chain McDonald's, have been awarded £10,000 by Scotland Yard. Helen Steel, 34, and Dave Morris, 46, who became known as the McLibel Two, launched legal proceedings in September 1998, accusing the Metropolitan Police of disclosing confidential information to investigators working for the hamburger chain. Scotland Yard agreed to the payout saying it regretted any distress that may have been caused to the pair by the alleged disclosure of their details." The report also notes that the original damages award in favor of McDonald's was reduced to £40,000 on appeal. The libel case is reported to have cost McDonald's on the order of £10m.