Hello there, CaseSnappy readers! Welcome back to another engaging edition of our Decoding Judgements series. Today's topic of debate centres around the intriguingly dense and multifaceted libel trial of the century: McDonald's Corporation v Steel & Morris [1997] EWHC 366 (QB), famously known as the 'McLibel' case.
This feud blew up when McDonald's, the global fast-food giant, lodged a libel suit against two environmental campaigners, Helen Steel and David Morris from London Greenpeace in 1990. Their contentious 'Factsheet' pinned several accusations of unethical conduct on McDonald’s, indicting them for issues like employee exploitation, promoting rainforest destruction, and partaking in animal cruelty, which provoked the colossal corporation into legal action.
The fundamental debate hinged on determining whether the factsheet disseminated by Steel and Morris carried sufficient 'defamatory statements' about McDonald’s that could justify infringing its rights. McDonald's argued that the allegations on the factsheet were baseless and defamatory, while the accused maintained that these were true details and stood as their honest beliefs. Both sides, without adequate representation, were embroiled in one of the most protracted civil trials in English legal history – more than 300 days long.
The verdict by Justice Bell from the High Court declared that some allegations on the factsheet were indeed defamatory. However, he also ruled that several claims, specifically regarding the company's poor treatment of their workforce and manipulative advertising practices, held substantial truth. Initially, damages were fixed at £60,000 but were later slashed to £40,000 on appeal. Legal battles continued as Steel and Morris contested this outcome to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), winning the case on the grounds that the initial trial process was skewed as they lacked legal aid, thus violating their right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
McDonald's Corporation v Steel & Morris (McLibel) [1997] EWHC 366 (QB) offers a momentous insight into libel law, freedom of speech, the rights of the individual, and corporate power. Above all, it underscores the fundamental human right to a fair trial, regardless of the odds stacked against an individual or their means. This landmark case sets the stage for balancing power dynamics in the face of powerful corporations.
Keep your eyes on our Decoding Judgements series for more legal breakdowns of fascinating cases. Remember to sign up to CaseSnappy for free and keep learning!