
	Where results make sense

Topic: McLibel case

Related Topics

McLibel Trial

Stella Liebeck

McDonalds

European Court of Human Rights

Corporate social responsibility

Mac McDonald

Animal cruelty

Dick McDonald

Ronald McDonald

Super Size Me

Public affairs degrees

Grimace

English Law

McDonaldland

Mighty Kids Meal

In the News (Mon 7 Dec 09)

Northern Trust

Marvin Harrison

Peter Chernin

Gary Locke

Match Play

Penelope Cruz

Mickey Rourke

AR Rahman

Danny Boyle

Hugh Jackman

	McLibel case - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
		The McLibel case is the colloquial term for McDonald's Restaurants v Morris and Steel, an English court action for libel filed by McDonald's Corporation against unemployed environmental activists Helen Steel and David Morris (often referred to as "The McLibel Two") over a pamphlet critical of the company.
		The case became a media circus, especially when top McDonald's executives were forced to take the stand and be questioned by the two non-lawyers.
		Lawyers for the McLibel Two argued that the original trial pitted a poor, powerless pair of individuals against the wealth and might of a great corporation and breached the pair's right to freedom of expression and to a fair trial.
	en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Mclibel (1241 words)

	The McLibel Trial
		The McLibel Trial is the infamous British court case between McDonald's and a former postman & a gardener from London (Helen Steel and Dave Morris).
		As a result of the court case, the Anti-McDonald's campaign mushroomed, the press coverage increased exponentially, this website was born and a feature length documentary was broadcast round the world.
		The McLibel 2 took the British Government to the European Court of Human Rights to defend the public's right to criticise multinationals, claiming UK libel laws are oppressive and unfair that they were denied a fair trial.
	www.mcspotlight.org /case (293 words)

	Statewatch News Online: UK: Victory for McLibel 2 against UK Government
		The European case, known as Steel and Morris vs UK was launched on 20th September 2000, exactly 10 years after the McDonald’s Corporation served writs on the McLibel 2 in an attempt to prevent the distribution of leaflets criticising the company.
		The McLibel 2 asserted in Strasbourg that English libel laws and libel court procedures are incompatible with the convention.
		Nor should in principle the fact that the plaintiff in the present case was a large multinational company deprive it of a right to defend itself against defamatory allegations or entail that the applicants should not have been required to prove the truth of the statements made.
	www.statewatch.org /news/2005/feb/11mclibel.htm (2364 words)

	Indymedia Scotland: newswire/102 (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-07)
		The McLibel 2 are asserting that English libel laws and libel court procedures are incompatible with the convention.
		- The McLibel case was unfair due to several factors, including the level of proof required, the imbalance of financial and legal resources as between the two sides and the denial of a jury trial.
		McDonald's, described by commentators at the end of the McLibel trial as being responsible for 'the worst Corporate PR disaster in history', continues to be an ever-growing focus for controversy and opposition around the world.
	scotland.indymedia.org /newswire/index.php?function=translation_edit&id=102 (584 words)

	[No title] (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-07)
		The court case started in 1994 and became the longest in English legal history - but defamation claims aren't entitled to legal aid on either side - so the former postman, him, and former gardener, her, had to mug up on the law.
		They took their case to Strasbourg and today the European Court of Human Rights ruled their rights to freedom of expression and a fair hearing had been violated because they'd had to represent themselves in such a "highly complex" case.
		Mclibel Film - A 60 minute film was made about the McLibel story, this is the official website.
	www.channel4.com /news/2005/02/week_3/14_mclibel_t.html (645 words)

	Spanner Films : intro : McLibel 2005
		McLibel is on for one week at the Odeon Wardour St, in London from Friday 17 Feb. Then our solitary 35mm print will be off for a trip round the country.
		McLibel will be broadcast on BBC2 on World Environment Day as part of their flagship series of landmark documentaries.
		McLibel is the story of two ordinary people who humiliated McDonald's in the biggest corporate PR disaster in history.
	www.spannerfilms.net /?lid=161 (833 words)

	Guardian Unlimited \| Special reports \| Q&A: the McLibel case
		The case was thought to have cost the fast food giant £10m and has been described as the biggest corporate PR disaster in history.
		The court upheld their case that defendants in libel cases should be given legal aid.
		The judges upheld the McLibel Two's contention that lack of legal aid had breached their rights to a fair trial and their freedom of expression, both of which are enshrined in the European convention on human rights.
	www.guardian.co.uk /food/Story/0,2763,1415202,00.html (910 words)

	Macmillan English Dictionary Resource Site – New Words – McLibel
		The two vowed not to pay and in the next year took their case to the European Court of Human Rights, claiming that their rights to a fair trial and freedom of expression had been breached.
		McLibel trial represents a landmark case in English legal history, not simply because of its length, but because it has forced the UK government to review libel laws and it highlights issues of the right to freedom of speech for powerless individuals who seek to expose the practices of powerful, wealthy corporations.
		McLibelled, it remains to be seen whether the significance of the case paves the way for future use of the term in the context of comparable issues of libel legislation and freedom of speech.
	www.macmillandictionary.com /New-Words/050221-McLibel.htm (501 words)

	Global Exchange : mclibel.html
		The case delved into a wider range of issues than any British law suit to date: human rights, animal welfare, food safety, the relation of diet to disease, the destruction of rain forests, and the impact of advertising on children.
		The McLibel Support Campaign, originally set up in 1990 just to support Morris and Steele, took on a life of its own and is a constant grassroots thorn in the foot of the global food giant.
		The McLibel case is more than just an isolated incident; it is a clear example of what can be accomplished by corporate campaigners if they persevere despite the odds against them.
	www.globalexchange.org /economy/econ101/mclibel.html (2199 words)

	McDonald's wins McLibel case--but is culpably cruel to animals, ANIMAL PEOPLE July/August 1997
		Despite near unanimous agreement by commentators that McDonald’s lost just by pressing the case, the British-based John Lewis department store chain on May 21 filed a parallel case against the National Anti-Hunt Campaign for distributing a leaflet that calls the firm “wildlife killers,” because it keeps a 3,000-acre birdshooting estate for the use of executives.
		The case is seen as the first major test of the “food libel”; laws passed by 14 states, largely in response to anti-meat campaigns.
		The verdict in another British “food libel”; case went against Colchester Oyster Fisheries on June 12, with a ruling that hygiene consultant Christoper Purslow was protected by qualified privilege in authoring a 1992 investigative report that confused two types of oyster and thus blamed the wrong kind for an outbreak of food poisoning.
	www.animalpeoplenews.org /97/6/court.html (248 words)

	Aljazeera.Net - European court rules on McLibel case (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-07)
		After the longest court case in English legal history, Helen Steel and David Morris were also deprived of their freedom of expression by their 1997 conviction, the court said.
		The ruling is also being hailed as groundbreaking by public campaigners of all issues, because the court declared there was "a strong public interest in enabling such groups and individuals outside the mainstream to contribute to the public debate".
		The original "McLibel" trial was the longest in English legal history, running for 313 days of testimony, eight weeks of closing speeches and six months of deliberation.
	english.aljazeera.net /NR/exeres/B779BDC5-032A-429F-BB4A-8D6603BD0833.htm (430 words)

	Wolfson McLibel Article
		This case, which took seven years from the service of the initial writs to the final judgment (and consisted of 313 days of trial), was known throughout the world as "McLibel." It was so convoluted that the judge, Mr.
		McLibel's unique legal posture allowed the court to rule on issues relating to the treatment of farm animals that rarely, if ever, are subject to judicial scrutiny.
		In addition, because McLibel was grounded in the tort of defamation, the court was able to examine evidence and rule on farming practices that would normally not reach the court.
	www.animallaw.info /articles/arus5animall21.htm (14279 words)

	Life Matters - 22/02/00: Dave Morris: Life After McLibel (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-07)
		The McLibel case is the longest trial in British legal history.
		The case, in which the fast-food giant McDonald's sued two British activists - Helen Steel (a part-time bar worker) and Dave Morris (an unemployed single father) - over their distribution of defamatory leaflets, took 313 days, cost $22 million and was a public relations disaster for McDonald's.
		The McLibel Two are appealing to the House of Lords and the European Court of Human Rights and are suing the police for handing private files to McDonald's.
	www.abc.net.au /rn/talks/lm/stories/s101520.htm (225 words)

	Statewatch News Online: McLibel case in Strasbourg court on 7 September (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-07)
		The McLibel 2 (Helen Steel, 39 and Dave Morris, 50) will be attending the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg on 7th September 2004.
		The ECHR have declared admissible their claim that the long running 'McLibel trial' breached their Article 6 right to a fair trial and Article 10 right to freedom of expression.
		The McLibel Applicants and the UK Government have already lodged hundreds of pages of written arguments on these issues.
	www.poptel.org.uk /statewatch/news/2004/aug/16mclibel.htm (745 words)

	McLibel case a signpost for Gunns action - Richard Ackland - www.smh.com.au
		Further, there was a violation of their freedom of expression which, although not absolute under the convention, is sufficient in this case to protect the right of peaceful protesters.
		The European-style thinking was along the lines that of course McDonald's is entitled to seek a remedy, but the state (Britain) must safeguard the countervailing interests in free expression and open debate and to provide "a measure of procedural fairness and equality of arms".
		The McLibel action nowadays is the least of McDonald's legal worries.
	www.smh.com.au /articles/2005/02/24/1109180038439.html (842 words)

	BBC NEWS \| UK \| 'McLibel' pair in fresh court bid
		The case in Strasbourg lasted less than a morning, in contrast with the earlier action, which began in 1994 and took a total of 314 days - becoming the longest court case in English legal history.
		The case was under-prepared, unready for trial and was advanced by two inexperienced, untrained and exhausted individuals...
		A McDonald's spokeswoman said: "The case taken to the European Court of Human Rights involves the UK government and not McDonald's, and therefore it would be inappropriate for us to comment in depth.
	news.bbc.co.uk /1/hi/uk/3632944.stm (663 words)

	AsiaMedia :: Story, Print Version (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-07)
		"McLibel," as the case became known, was England's longest and most one-sided civil court case.
		Yesterday morning, the last and perhaps most significant act of McLibel was to be played out in the European court of human rights in Brussels.
		Lawyers for Steel and Morris -- this time paid out of EU legal aid funds -- will appear for two hours in front of 15 judges to try to force the British government to change the libel laws which many believe stifle free speech, favor the rich and are out of step with other states.
	www.asiamedia.ucla.edu /print.asp?parentid=14426 (589 words)

	[Imcuk public] FW: Urgent: McLibel Crisis Press Release
		The McLibel defendants, Helen Steel and Dave Morris, who without legal aid defended themselves against the $40 billion dollar McDonalds Corporation in the longest trial in English history, are currently in the middle of an application against the British Government at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.
		Many of her own files are in storage and so the McLibel legal office is absolutely essential for the conduct of their case.
		Under Article 6: The McLibel case was unfair and oppressive due to several factors - for example, the imbalance of financial and legal resources as between the two sides and the denial of a jury trial.
	archives.lists.indymedia.org /imc-uk/2001-May/000276.html (1295 words)

	BBC - Storyville - McLibel
		The David and Goliath story of the McLibel Two - a postman and gardener who took on the fast-food giant in England's longest-ever legal wrangle.
		Two contemporary issues that frustrate liberals are the prevalence of fast-food outlets and the continuing outrage of the British libel laws, which stack the odds in favour of the plaintiff, especially when he, she or it is powerful.
		Both these preoccupations are neatly brought together in McLibel, a hilarious and engrossing account of the seven years in which McDonald's attempted to extract damages from two penniless London activists.
	www.bbc.co.uk /bbcfour/documentaries/storyville/mclibel.shtml (210 words)

	McLibel Case
		Although they ostensibly lost the libel case against McDonald's in 1997, the court upheld their complaints that McDonalds pay low wages to workers, do not support union membership, and are responsible for cruelty to animals used in its food products and exploit children in their advertising campaigns.
		I think we should all be proud of the stance they took in defence of their beliefs, and ashamed of the English Legal system for forcing them to defend themselves (they couldn't afford to pay for legal counsel, but did get help from some law students).
		The case is estimated to have cost McDonalds £10m, and has been a PR disaster.
	www.endevil.com /mclibel.html (263 words)

	BBC NEWS \| UK \| 'McLibel' pair win legal aid case
		Helen Steel and David Morris, from north London, dubbed the "McLibel Two", were found guilty in a 1990s trial of libelling the company in a leaflet.
		At the end of the case the High Court ruled McDonald's had been libelled and awarded the company £60,000 in damages, later reduced to £40,000 on appeal.
		The cutback in legal aid and emergence of "no win no fee" agreements between lawyers and their clients had largely plugged the hole in provision which led to the action, he said.
	news.bbc.co.uk /1/hi/uk/4266209.stm (627 words)

	BBC - BBC Four - Have Your Say: McLibel
		The case also took so long because we were being forced to prove matters of basic common sense.
		I've followed the case in the papers almost since the beginning, but this documentary really brought the struggle to life in a way news reporting cannot.
		One case was thrown out because of perverse decisions by the court, the other case is being defended by the same QC as the McLibel case.
	www.bbc.co.uk /bbcfour/yoursay/mclibel.shtml (4663 words)

	Swans Commentary: "McLibel": Food For Thought And Inspiration For The Soul, by Jan Baughman - jeb147
		McLibel is a Franny Armstrong documentary that chronicles the fight of two British citizens and a core group of volunteers who represented themselves against a libel charge by corporate giant McDonalds and its team of highly paid lawyers.
		The cards were stacked higher against them when McDonalds successfully argued that the case would be too complicated for a jury to understand, so rather than argue the case before a jury of their peers, their only arbiter was the judge.
		McLibel addresses one by one the libel charges and the evidence on which the two based their claims.
	www.swans.com /library/art11/jeb147.html (987 words)

	McLibel Case The story of two ordinary vegetarians taking on the giant McDonald
		The case most likely could never have been filed in the United States, where the First and Fourteenth Amendments provide protection of freedom of speech and a corporation may only maintain an action for libel if it can prove malice on the part of the person alleged to have made the offending comment.
		The case attracted hundreds of articles in the press (including front-page coverage in the Wall Street Journal) plus international TV and radio coverage in the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, France, South Africa, Belgium, Netherlands, Germany, Japan, Trinidad, Russia, Spain, Italy, Switzerland, Austria, Thailand and Israel.
		McLIBEL JUDGE CONDEMNS McDONALDS' CORE BUSINESS PRACTICES -- Mr Justice Bell ruled that substantial and significant parts of the London Greenpeace Factsheet criticising the company have been proved to be true by the evidence brought by the McLibel Defendants, Helen Steel and Dave Morris.
	www.jivdaya.org /mclibel_case_the_story.htm (1864 words)

	'McLibel' pair win legal aid case - The Vegan Forum - a vegan message board
		The case is thought to have cost the fast food giant £10m and was described as "the biggest corporate PR disaster in history".
		In the Human Rights court case, Ms Steel and Mr Morris, both from Tottenham, north London, argued that the government breached their human rights by failing to make legal aid available and because the libel laws obliged them to justify every word of anti-McDonald's allegations contained in the leaflets they distributed.
		McLibel, which follows Helen Steel and Dave Morris, the two environmental activists through the libel action involving McDonald’s that became the longest in British history.
	www.veganforum.com /forums/showthread.php?t=2884 (1936 words)

Try your search on: Qwika (all wikis)