1. McLibel Case

2. Plaintiff Helen Steel & David Morris Defendant McDonal d

3. The film premiere in London in April 2005, describe two people are engaged in social work is accused of libel McDonald's story in 1990. Origin, Helen and Dave production and send out a titled "McDonald's what's the problem?" The leaflets, expose the exploitation, hypocrisy, cruel multinational fast food chain enterprise and the accused, Helen and Dave choice and the litigation fight to the end, and this case also became a British tie up for the most ever litigation case. 1997 years after the verdict, Helen and Dave turned to the European court of human rights against the British government, reason is for British libel laws, refused to provide legal assistance to Helen and Dave as vulnerable to the defendant, but allow deep-pocketed, such as McDonald's strong power of enterprise have unfair advantage, this is a violation of European human rights agreement. The European court of human rights in February 2005 with Dave rational judgment Helen. Backgroud

4. Having largely beaten McDonald's... we have now exposed the notoriously oppressive and unfair UK laws. As a result of the... ruling today, the government may be forced to amend or scrap some of the existing UK laws. We hope that this will result in greater public scrutiny and criticism of powerful organisations whose practices have a detrimental effect on society and the environment. The McLibel campaign has already proved that determined and widespread grass roots protests and defiance can undermine those who try to silence their critics, and also render oppressive laws unworkable. The continually growing opposition to McDonald's and all it stands for is a vindication of all the efforts of those around the world who have been exposing and challenging the corporation's business practices.

6. Judgment High Court The case was adjudicated by Hon. Mr Justice Rodger Bell.On 19 June 1997, Mr Justice Bell delivered a more than 1,000- page decision largely in favour of McDonald's, summarised by a 45-page paper read in court. Steel and Morris were found liable on several points, although the judge also found that some of the points in the pamphlet were true. McDonald's considered this a legal victory, though it was tempered by the judge's endorsement of some of the allegations in the pamphlet. Specifically, Bell ruled that McDonald's endangered the health of its workers and customers by "misleading advertising", that they "exploit children", that they were "culpably responsible" in the infliction of unnecessary cruelty to animals, and that they paid its workers low wages. Furthermore, although the decision awarded £60,000 to the company, McDonald's legal costs were much greater, and the defendants lacked the funds to pay it. Steel and Morris immediately appealed the decision.

7. McDonald's Corporation v Steel & Morris [1997] EWHC QB 366, known as "the McLibel case" was an English lawsuit filed by McDonald's Corporation against environmental activists Helen Steel and David Morris (often referred to as "The McLibel Two") over a pamphlet critical of the company. The original case lasted ten years, making it the longest-running libel case in English history. lawsuitMcDonald's Corporationenvironmental A feature-length documentary film, McLibel, was made about the case by Franny Armstrong. McLibel Franny Armstrong Although McDonald's won two hearings of the case in English courts, the partial nature of the victory, the David-vs-Goliath nature of the case, and the drawn-out litigation embarrassed the company. McDonald's announced that it did not plan to collect the £40,000 award that it was awarded by the courts. hearingsvictory

8. Conclusion Why is this case important? It is significant for three reasons: 1. Demonstrates that under the rule of law, poor and legally inexperienced people still have a chance to obtain justice. It shows that under a true rule of law system power and wealth does not buy justice. 2. The McDonalds company suffered very bad publicity and failed to reach its objectives. 3. That companies have obligations and responsibilities to society, including communities and workers, and to the environment.