(NOT SO) LUDICROUS LITIGATION: MCLIBEL (MCDONALD’S CORPORATION V STEEL & MORRIS)

Welcome to (not so) Ludicrous Litigation, in which we cover infamous legal cases and explain the rationale behind them! This month, we bring you McDonald’s Corporation v Steel & Morris, a David-and-Goliath case involving the tort of libel. Read on to find out whether the corporate giant or the environmental activists emerged victorious in this case, which at nearly ten years is the longest-running libel case in British history.

Defamation is a tort defined as damaging someone or something’s reputation, especially through misrepresentation and with malicious intent; it takes two legally actionable forms, written (libel) and spoken (slander) statements. McLibel involved McDonald's suing two London activists, Dave Morris and Helen Steel, for libel over a pamphlet they distributed criticizing the company's business practices. The pamphlet accused McDonald's of various violations of corporate ethics, from worker exploitation to animal cruelty. The case was widely criticized for being an example of "libel chill," in which corporations use the threat of legal action to silence critics.

Although McDonald's ultimately won the case in 1997, the case drew attention to the need for greater corporate social responsibility and highlighted the need to protect free speech, especially where it was conducive to public awareness. The case also had a significant impact on the legal system in the UK, leading to defamation law reforms. One example is the creation of the "public interest defense," wherein defendants can protect themselves by arguing that their statements were made in the public interest and therefore not defamatory.