IANAL, as I've said before, but the Food Safety Act ('90) Part II seems to cover this-Samurai- said:There is no legal or illegal temperature for serving beverages(That I can find, anyway. If you can find one, I'll happily retract that statement). If the company can heat it to 8000 degrees, they can serve it.
(BTW Beverages are defined as food earlier)7 Rendering food injurious to health
(1) Any person who renders any food injurious to health by means of any of the following operations, namely?
(a) adding any article or substance to the food;
(b) using any article or substance as an ingredient in the preparation of the food;
(c) abstracting any constituent from the food; and
(d) subjecting the food to any other process or treatment,
with intent that it shall be sold for human consumption, shall be guilty of an offence.
(2) In determining for the purposes of this section and section 8(2) below whether any food is injurious to health, regard shall be had?
(a) not only to the probable effect of that food on the health of a person consuming it; but
(b) also to the probable cumulative effect of food of substantially the same composition on the health of a person consuming it in ordinary quantities.
(3) In this Part ?injury?, in relation to health, includes any impairment, whether permanent or temporary, and ?injurious to health? shall be construed accordingly.
Although the workers could claim due diligence against charges and the managers could claim company policy, with the company policy officers claiming, as McDonald's did, that it was statistically safe.14 Selling food not of the nature or substance or quality demanded
(1) Any person who sells to the purchaser?s prejudice any food which is not of the nature or substance or quality demanded by the purchaser shall be guilty of an offence.
And this is only UK Law; I'm nowhere near qualified enough to give ideas on US Law.
700 people sued McDonalds for injuries. I think we can reasonably assume there's at least another 1000 out there who didn't sue. Nearly 2000 people directly injured and MaccyD's (and others) are still doing this, despite their own market research that states it's counter to their sales?Everything shouldn't have to come with a warning label warning you about every possibility that could happen to you if you use the product. People should use some common sense and stop blaming others for their stupid mistakes.
I think it deserves to be investigated if nothing else. Remember that Liebeck only got <$6000 after hounding them repeatedly.
In this case, and possibly this alone, I'd be far more interested in the coffee than the suit. If injuring 700 people is insignificant to drive change, that makes me exceedingly worried.Lawsuits like this come about because people don't want to accept the fact that they screwed something up. They don't want to be responsible. They just want money.
BUT, the Lineage guy...yeah, he's a tool.